There are 12 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: Spoken French Orthography (was Re: "Re: Colloquial French resour
From: J. 'Mach' Wust
1.2. Re: Spoken French Orthography (was Re: "Re: Colloquial French resour
From: R A Brown
2.1. Re: Melin's Swedish Shorthand -- for English! (was: Re: Gateway to c
From: J. 'Mach' Wust
3a. Re: Hangul
From: Matthew George
4a. Working on my first conlang.
From: Austin Blanton
4b. Re: Working on my first conlang.
From: Padraic Brown
4c. Re: Working on my first conlang.
From: Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
4d. Re: Working on my first conlang.
From: Austin Blanton
4e. Re: Working on my first conlang.
From: Padraic Brown
4f. Re: Working on my first conlang.
From: Roger Mills
5.1. Re: Kalchian verbal conjugation
From: Padraic Brown
6. verb-less language, maybe
From: qiihoskeh
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: Spoken French Orthography (was Re: "Re: Colloquial French resour
Posted by: "J. 'Mach' Wust" j_mach_w...@shared-files.de
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 8:35 am ((PDT))
On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 08:04:18 +0100, R A Brown wrote:
>On 11/10/2013 18:50, J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
>[snip]
>> I have no objection to this statement about the history
>> of the English language (or of any natlang). I have only
>> objected to your intitial statement: "I think most of us
>> here will agree that the *primary* form of any natlang
>> is the spoken form." I did not know that you implied
>> "historically" or "diachronically". I only object to
>> this statement if it is meant synchronically.
>
>No, I was not making a diachronic statement only. IMHO it
>applies diachronically as well.
>
>I was making a *linguistic* statement (i.e. not a pedagogic
>one; not one from the point of view of a prescriptive
>grammarian etc).
So was I. From a linguistic point of view, a natlang's spoken form
is not always first. Believe me, I have not made up this notion. I
have learnt it while studying linguistics, with a special emphasis
on writing. Therefore, an assertion like yours very strongly rings
a bell for me. I believe that since the late 1990s, the notion that
spoken language has been overemphasized in 20th century linguistics
has become quite commonplace. Even a popular science overview on
linguistics such as David Crystals Cambridge encyclopedia of
language dedicates an entire page to this notion.
>It seems to me that you are reading into the words 'primary'
>and 'secondary' judgmental values that are not warranted in
>the normal use of these words.
I admire and support your firm rejection of judgemental
connotations. However, I think connotations do not disappear just
because we reject them. They are there whether we like it or not.
>Also you appear to be confusing the 'literary form' of a
>language with _written_. _Any form of English (German,
>Spanish, Chinese etc, etc) from very formal and literary,
>through colloquial to contemporary slang can be (and in some
>case often is) written._
You are referring here to the difference between literacy as a
function of the medium of language (spoken versus written) and
literacy as a function of style (colloquial versus elevated). I am
well aware of that differnce.
And if we are accusing each other of confusion (I normally try to
avoid it, but sometimes I play an eye for an eye): You appear to be
underestimating the differences between spoken language and written
language, which may be quite natural for speakers of languages such
as standard English or standard German where the prevailing view is
that people write as they speak. Conscience of the difference is
naturally higher for speakers of language forms that are more
obviously different.
>That these different strata of language and different
>dialects can be written is due to the fact that they are
>spoken (tho in the case of some literary styles this may be
>more in theory than in practice). Furthermore, the written
>form can be rendered in Roman script, Braille, Shavian
>script, one of the several extant systems of shorthand,
>various personal codes etc., etc.
>
>Finally my original statement, which you quote above,
>begins: "I think most of us here ...." - it does not say
>_all_. That only one person has disagreed seems not to
>invalidate "most", methinks.
>
>I think this particular sub-thread of "Spoken French
>Orthography" should come to an end.
Amen to that.
--
grüess
mach
Messages in this topic (37)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: Spoken French Orthography (was Re: "Re: Colloquial French resour
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 12:46 pm ((PDT))
On 12/10/2013 16:35, J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2013 08:04:18 +0100, R A Brown wrote:
[snip]
>
>> It seems to me that you are reading into the words
>> 'primary' and 'secondary' judgmental values that are
>> not warranted in the normal use of these words.
>
> I admire and support your firm rejection of judgemental
> connotations. However, I think connotations do not
> disappear just because we reject them. They are there
> whether we like it or not.
Darn it! I've been misusing these words all these years and
misunderstanding those around me.
Oh well, what do I know about English anyway? Though I've
been speaking it and writing it for over seventy years, I'm
only an L1 speaker after all. I bow to your superior
knowledge of my language.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
If /ni/ can change into /ɑ/, then practically
anything can change into anything.
[YUEN REN CHAO]
Messages in this topic (37)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: Melin's Swedish Shorthand -- for English! (was: Re: Gateway to c
Posted by: "J. 'Mach' Wust" j_mach_w...@shared-files.de
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:08 am ((PDT))
On Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:38:02 +0200, BPJ wrote:
>2013-10-10 23:26, J. 'Mach' Wust skrev:
...
>> The Stolze-Schrey system also marks double consonants,
>> but by using a third height (quadruple-height, by your counting) of
>> consonant signs. The Deutsche Einheitskurzschrift simply omits
>> consonant doubling. While this is kind of adequate to standard German
>> phonology, it means not marking (leaving up to context) the
>> distinction between "checked" and "free" vowels.
>
>Swedish is a bit different in that it actually has geminate
>consonants, although it is similar in that stressed vowels before
>a same-morpheme consonant cluster, including geminates, are
>short, while stressed vowels in an open syllable or in a syllable
>ending in a single consonant are long, while stressed vowels
>before a consonant and a morpheme boundary followed by a
>consonant (VC#C) vary lexically, lectally and depending on which
>morphemes are involved. Thus vowel length depends on stress and
>syllable- and morpheme structure. There are Swedish speakers who
>perceive vowel length as phonemic, but I don't think I ever had,
>since my Dialect1 has a lot of alternation of length in the same
>root when consonantal endings are added. Also my accent has little
>or no qualitative difference between short and long stressed vowels.
But you still have a quantitative difference? My accent keeps the
qualitative difference between what originally were high short and
long stressed vowels (for instance /ˈriːfː/ 'ripe' and /ˈɡ̊ɪb̥/
'give!'), but through processes of vowel shortening and lengthening
it has developed a secondary quantitative difference (for instance
through shortening in /ʒ̊rib̥/ 'write!' and through lengthening in
/b̥eʒ̊rɪːb̥/ 'description'), so now there are long and short pairs
that do not differ in quality for every stressed vowel.
...
>>> Thus St. Swedish _mossa_ /ˈmos:a/ 'moss' is /ˈmɞːsɑ/
>>> to me in dialectal mode (I code-switch a lot!) and _fågel_
>>> /ˈfoːgel/ 'bird' is /ˈfɞːgɛl/ to me -- and to some west Swedes
>>> it's even /ˈfɵgːɛl/ --, sometimes written _môsa, fôgel/fûggel_
>>> when writing dialect.
>>
>> The shift of length from the vowel to the consonant between /ˈfɞːgɛl/
>> and /ˈfɵgːɛl/ is a very interesting phenomenon. Is this regular with
>> all long vowels?
>
>Sort of. _Mossa_ was _mŏsa_ and _fågel_ was _fŭgl > fŭgel_ in
>Old Swedish, thus _mosa_ had and _fugl_ came to have a short
>stressed vowel followed by a single consonant. Around 1300 all
>such words were 'normalized' by either lengthening the vowel or
>geminating the consonant, and different dialects 'chose'
>differently for different words;
I see. Interesting.
...
>> Melin's way of using the connecting upstroke as real vowel letters
>> may well be more natural and practical than Faulmann's system. I will
>> not learn it, though, until after I have learnt Gregg's shorthand.
>> This system has always intrigued me as the most elegant of Western
>> shorthand systems.
>
>It certainly feels more natural once you've learned it, but has
>the downside that consonant signs other than the first in each
>word are written above or below the baseline depending on the
>height of the preceding vowel. The resulting _klättereffekter_
>('climbing effects') can be bothersome, but are counterbalanced by
>breaking longer compounds (but with a smaller space than
>inter-word space between the parts!) The word _överläkarvikarie_
>'stand-in chief physician' is proverbial, but in practice it's
>abbreviated to ÖverLKVIK.
You are speaking about Melin's shorthand there? The same effects
occur heavily in Faulmann-type vocalization, too. Except worse,
since compounds are often not broken up. And I think Gregg has also
some of this effect.
...
>> The regular formation of the consonant+T clusters is a nice solution.
>> The German systems use a triple-height upwards stroke -- and drop the
>> +T in "Eilschrift".
>
>Final _-t_ is important in Swedish as it is the neuter singular
>adjective ending, adverb ending and supine ending. BTW many use
>special wide versions of D, T, St, J etc. for Nd Nt Nst, Nj etc.
>after E and Ä instead of the backwardsleaning signs.
So it may be more important than in German, where it mostly occurs
as third person verbal ending or as the weak verbs' past participle
ending. In both cases, it is often redundant, by the presence of a
third person pronoun or of the past past participle prefix ge-.
--
grüess
mach
Messages in this topic (32)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Hangul
Posted by: "Matthew George" matt....@gmail.com
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 11:37 am ((PDT))
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 8:27 PM, Daniel Bowman <danny.c.bow...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I am not a Tolkien scholar but this seems a bit surprising. Did the Elves
> have exceptionally good memories? Otherwise, I would think writing would
> serve a practical purpose regardless of one's mortality or lack thereof.
>
Yes, they did - or at least, we are told that for them, memory was more
like waking experience than it is for mortals. But for a long time, they
didn't need writing to retain memory of important things, they just
remembered, or passed on knowledge through word-of-mouth. Only when their
societies were in serious danger of destruction, and the continuity that
made their oral culture possible likely to be disrupted, did they begin to
heavily record in writing.
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Working on my first conlang.
Posted by: "Austin Blanton" marblebo...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 5:39 pm ((PDT))
Hello. I am a relative newbie to conlanging. I have admired the works of others
for years, but have never really dipped into it fully until now. My first love
is fantasy writing, so my languages will for the most part serve as a native
tongue for races or cultures in my novels.
For my first language, I want to create a language for a race of
anthropomorphic cat creatures. Original, I know. That being said... I have
begun the process of figuring out what kinds of sounds they are capable of
making. One example is the fact that because of their top lip being split down
the middle in the manner of most felids, they can not make bilabial sounds.
Similar to Spanish in that B and V would be interchangeable for them. They
would not be able to pronounce out B sound, so would resort to V. Base -> Vase.
In general, it tends to follow a Spanish or Arabic accent, with the smooth
sounds, and tendency to have a feline purr. The purr itself will stem from them
being anthropomorphic jungle cats, but will serve a greater purpose, similar to
the ceceo, or the Spanish trill.
If this doesn't sound altogether silly to you, I would love some help getting
started with my first constructed language. Good day.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: Working on my first conlang.
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:43 pm ((PDT))
From: Austin Blanton <marblebo...@yahoo.com>
> Hello. I am a relative newbie to conlanging. I have admired the works of
> others
> for years, but have never really dipped into it fully until now. My first
> love
> is fantasy writing, so my languages will for the most part serve as a native
> tongue for races or cultures in my novels.
I think a lot of us go along this path. Most of my conlangs are spoken
somewhere in
my own fantasy world.
> For my first language, I want to create a language for a race of
> anthropomorphic
> cat creatures. Original, I know.
No worries -- one of our best conlangs (at least in my opinion), Teonaht, got
its start
as the language of an anthropomorphic cat race (the Feleonim)!
http://dedalvs.conlang.org/smileys/2007.html
> That being said... I have begun the process of
> figuring out what kinds of sounds they are capable of making. One example is
> the
> fact that because of their top lip being split down the middle in the manner
> of
> most felids, they can not make bilabial sounds.
I would only note they don't háve to share traits with terrestrial felines, if
you don't want
them to... In other words, there could be other reasons for the [B] / [v]
fusion in their
language. Some historical confluence for example. A Great Sound Shift.
> Similar to Spanish in that B and
> V would be interchangeable for them. They would not be able to pronounce out
> B
> sound, so would resort to V. Base -> Vase. In general, it tends to follow a
> Spanish or Arabic accent, with the smooth sounds, and tendency to have a
> feline
> purr. The purr itself will stem from them being anthropomorphic jungle cats,
> but
> will serve a greater purpose, similar to the ceceo, or the Spanish trill.
Neat. Is their culture one of absolute and unassailable hauture, where other
sophonts barely
register on their radar of personhood?
> If this doesn't sound altogether silly to you, I would love some help
> getting started with my first constructed language. Good day.
I don't think I've met with anything that really sounds silly hereabouts...
Unusual, sure,
unworkable, absolutely, impossible, quite possibly. But silly? Nah...
I hope you'll keep us posted and join in the discussion!
Padraic
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: Working on my first conlang.
Posted by: "Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews" goldyemo...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 9:55 pm ((PDT))
Im not sure if you have an original idea. Do they shift into cat form?
I have some audio books on linguistics and phonetics. There's a website I'm
using to guide me called
www.fridaynightlinguistics.org/languagecreation
I also have a historical linguistics book.
Pen name:
Mellissa Green
Blog
www.theworldofyemora.wordpress.com
Twitter
@GreenNovelist
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:conl...@listserv.brown.edu] On
Behalf Of Austin Blanton
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 8:29 PM
To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
Subject: Working on my first conlang.
Hello. I am a relative newbie to conlanging. I have admired the works of
others for years, but have never really dipped into it fully until now. My
first love is fantasy writing, so my languages will for the most part serve
as a native tongue for races or cultures in my novels.
For my first language, I want to create a language for a race of
anthropomorphic cat creatures. Original, I know. That being said... I have
begun the process of figuring out what kinds of sounds they are capable of
making. One example is the fact that because of their top lip being split
down the middle in the manner of most felids, they can not make bilabial
sounds. Similar to Spanish in that B and V would be interchangeable for
them. They would not be able to pronounce out B sound, so would resort to V.
Base -> Vase. In general, it tends to follow a Spanish or Arabic accent,
with the smooth sounds, and tendency to have a feline purr. The purr itself
will stem from them being anthropomorphic jungle cats, but will serve a
greater purpose, similar to the ceceo, or the Spanish trill.
If this doesn't sound altogether silly to you, I would love some help
getting started with my first constructed language. Good day. =
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4d. Re: Working on my first conlang.
Posted by: "Austin Blanton" marblebo...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun Oct 13, 2013 4:59 am ((PDT))
I would like to have them share features with terrestrial cats. Both for
realism, and the fact that their world was once ours. In fact, the progenitors
of the race are reincarnated humans. As for being their hauture... No. They
consider their feral brethren as the same, but they have different conjugations
when speaking to them.
But where should I begin?
> On Oct 13, 2013, at 12:43 AM, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> From: Austin Blanton <marblebo...@yahoo.com>
>
>
>> Hello. I am a relative newbie to conlanging. I have admired the works of
>> others
>> for years, but have never really dipped into it fully until now. My first
>> love
>> is fantasy writing, so my languages will for the most part serve as a native
>> tongue for races or cultures in my novels.
>
> I think a lot of us go along this path. Most of my conlangs are spoken
> somewhere in
> my own fantasy world.
>
>> For my first language, I want to create a language for a race of
>> anthropomorphic
>> cat creatures. Original, I know.
>
> No worries -- one of our best conlangs (at least in my opinion), Teonaht, got
> its start
> as the language of an anthropomorphic cat race (the Feleonim)!
> http://dedalvs.conlang.org/smileys/2007.html
>
>> That being said... I have begun the process of
>> figuring out what kinds of sounds they are capable of making. One example is
>> the
>> fact that because of their top lip being split down the middle in the manner
>> of
>> most felids, they can not make bilabial sounds.
>
> I would only note they don't háve to share traits with terrestrial felines,
> if you don't want
> them to... In other words, there could be other reasons for the [B] / [v]
> fusion in their
> language. Some historical confluence for example. A Great Sound Shift.
>
>> Similar to Spanish in that B and
>> V would be interchangeable for them. They would not be able to pronounce out
>> B
>> sound, so would resort to V. Base -> Vase. In general, it tends to follow a
>> Spanish or Arabic accent, with the smooth sounds, and tendency to have a
>> feline
>> purr. The purr itself will stem from them being anthropomorphic jungle cats,
>> but
>> will serve a greater purpose, similar to the ceceo, or the Spanish trill.
>
> Neat. Is their culture one of absolute and unassailable hauture, where other
> sophonts barely
> register on their radar of personhood?
>
>> If this doesn't sound altogether silly to you, I would love some help
>> getting started with my first constructed language. Good day.
>
>
> I don't think I've met with anything that really sounds silly hereabouts...
> Unusual, sure,
> unworkable, absolutely, impossible, quite possibly. But silly? Nah...
>
> I hope you'll keep us posted and join in the discussion!
>
> Padraic
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4e. Re: Working on my first conlang.
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun Oct 13, 2013 6:08 am ((PDT))
From: "marblebo...@yahoo.com" <marblebo...@yahoo.com>
> I would like to have them share features with terrestrial cats. Both for
> realism, and the fact that their world was once ours.
Okay!
By the last statement, is this some far (far!) future Earth?
> In fact, the progenitors of the race are reincarnated humans. As for being
> their
> hauture... No. They consider their feral brethren as the same, but they have
> different conjugations when speaking to them.
This is an interesting idea. So we know they have a different modality when
talking to feral beings of roughly the same species. In what way are these
"conjugations" different? Do they also use different sets of pronouns? Also,
what do you mean by "conjugation" here?
> But where should I begin?
Begin at the beginning and unfold carefully!
If you look at the thread on Kalchian verbal behaviour, that is literally the
one of the first things I discovered about the language. The grammar sketch
presently consists of seven short sections: phonology, four place deixis,
animacy, animacy and agency, evidentiality, gender and verbal morphology
and syntax (this last of which is what made up the body of that original post).
The lexicon consists of a whopping one noun (dog), one verb (see/examine)
and three pronominals (I, thou, one).
You've already mentioned several interesting things: the idea of reincarnated
humans being the progenitors of this felid race; the idea of some kind of future
Earth scenario; the idea that (presumably more civilised) felids speak to their
feral relations using different word forms ("conjugations") than they would
with each other.
Start by telling us about this world, its people, how they got there. What is
their culture like? Clearly, even though you say they view their feral bretheren
as "the same", they do obviously treat them quite differently. Is there any
hint of chauvinism or racism/speciesism in these different modes of address?
For that matter, what makes these people and their feral cousins different?
That ought to keep you busy for some time!
Padraic
>
>> On Oct 13, 2013, at 12:43 AM, Padraic Brown <elemti...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> From: Austin Blanton <marblebo...@yahoo.com>
>>
>>
>>> Hello. I am a relative newbie to conlanging. I have admired the works
> of others
>>> for years, but have never really dipped into it fully until now. My
> first love
>>> is fantasy writing, so my languages will for the most part serve as a
> native
>>> tongue for races or cultures in my novels.
>>
>> I think a lot of us go along this path. Most of my conlangs are spoken
> somewhere in
>> my own fantasy world.
>>
>>> For my first language, I want to create a language for a race of
> anthropomorphic
>>> cat creatures. Original, I know.
>>
>> No worries -- one of our best conlangs (at least in my opinion), Teonaht,
> got its start
>> as the language of an anthropomorphic cat race (the Feleonim)!
> http://dedalvs.conlang.org/smileys/2007.html
>>
>>> That being said... I have begun the process of
>>> figuring out what kinds of sounds they are capable of making. One
> example is the
>>> fact that because of their top lip being split down the middle in the
> manner of
>>> most felids, they can not make bilabial sounds.
>>
>> I would only note they don't háve to share traits with terrestrial
> felines, if you don't want
>> them to... In other words, there could be other reasons for the [B] / [v]
> fusion in their
>> language. Some historical confluence for example. A Great Sound Shift.
>>
>>> Similar to Spanish in that B and
>>> V would be interchangeable for them. They would not be able to
> pronounce out B
>>> sound, so would resort to V. Base -> Vase. In general, it tends to
> follow a
>>> Spanish or Arabic accent, with the smooth sounds, and tendency to have
> a feline
>>> purr. The purr itself will stem from them being anthropomorphic jungle
> cats, but
>>> will serve a greater purpose, similar to the ceceo, or the Spanish
> trill.
>>
>> Neat. Is their culture one of absolute and unassailable hauture, where
> other sophonts barely
>> register on their radar of personhood?
>>
>>> If this doesn't sound altogether silly to you, I would love some
> help
>>> getting started with my first constructed language. Good day.
>>
>>
>> I don't think I've met with anything that really sounds silly
> hereabouts... Unusual, sure,
>> unworkable, absolutely, impossible, quite possibly. But silly? Nah...
>>
>> I hope you'll keep us posted and join in the discussion!
>>
>> Padraic
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4f. Re: Working on my first conlang.
Posted by: "Roger Mills" romi...@yahoo.com
Date: Sun Oct 13, 2013 6:31 am ((PDT))
Hello and welcome.
My first reaction was, Oh goodness me, great minds think alike. My conlang Kash
is also spoken by people evolved from a (sort-of) great-cat species on another
planet. If you want, take a look at the website,
http://cinduworld.tripod.com/contents.htm. I didn't deal with the split-lip
problem, but the pronunciation of the language is, like yours, quite
Spanish-like. Do you know Spanish? My original (1976 and on) Romanization was
even based on Spanish (since the first contacter was HIspanic), with "j" for
/x/ (now "h"), "ch" and "nch" for /tS/ and /ndZ/ (now "c" and "nj"); there's a
lot of influence from Indonesian languages too, which was my academic field.
I wish you great success!!
Roger Mills
________________________________
From: Austin Blanton <marblebo...@yahoo.com>
To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2013 8:29 PM
Subject: Working on my first conlang.
Hello. I am a relative newbie to conlanging. I have admired the works of others
for years, but have never really dipped into it fully until now. My first love
is fantasy writing, so my languages will for the most part serve as a native
tongue for races or cultures in my novels.
For my first language, I want to create a language for a race of
anthropomorphic cat creatures. Original, I know. That being said... I have
begun the process of figuring out what kinds of sounds they are capable of
making. One example is the fact that because of their top lip being split down
the middle in the manner of most felids, they can not make bilabial sounds.
Similar to Spanish in that B and V would be interchangeable for them. They
would not be able to pronounce out B sound, so would resort to V. Base -> Vase.
In general, it tends to follow a Spanish or Arabic accent, with the smooth
sounds, and tendency to have a feline purr. The purr itself will stem from them
being anthropomorphic jungle cats, but will serve a greater purpose, similar to
the ceceo, or the Spanish trill.
If this doesn't sound altogether silly to you, I would love some help getting
started with my first constructed language. Good day.
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5.1. Re: Kalchian verbal conjugation
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Oct 12, 2013 10:20 pm ((PDT))
From: Siva Kalyan <sivakalyan.prince...@gmail.com>
>This reminds me of what are called "direct/inverse marking" systems (found, I
>think, in Native American languages as well as Sino-Tibetan), where the verb
>is unmarked if the subject is higher on the person hierarchy than the object
>(e.g. 1st pers. subject, 3rd pers. object), but takes an "inverse" marker if
>the object ranks higher than the subject (e.g. 3rd pers. subject, 1st pers.
>object).
Okay, that's neat! I could see a system where the higher animacy ranking is
unmarked -- no need because its superiority is obvious. ;)) In Kalchian, I
don't see how, for example, a dog's animacy could "outrank" a man's animacy.
If the dog sees / examines the man, then the roles are simply reversed.
It is certainly possible for a IV-A being (a man, e.g.) to "slide" from his
rank to say II-I. This is because there are two components to animacy: the
innate is what you are by nature; the momentary is relative to circumstance.
So, a man is by nature IV-A (the highest rank, which they call "wisdom"), but
at night when he's snug in bed he becomes II-I (a rather lower, inanimate rank,
which they call "instinct"). The same man could devolve further, for example,
to I-A ("active") by joining in with an angry mob. If he's killed by the
constabulary for participating in said mob, he will become level I-I
("stative") -- a corpse.
So, actual circumstance can trump innate quality, but this trumping happens
within a being. It's not one being trumping another.
>This would mean that your system is typologically unusual, in that 1>3 is
>overtly marked, even though 2>3 and 3>3 are unmarked. Then again, I don't know
>what direct/inverse marking systems look like for verbs of perception.
>
>
>Another thing: I assume it's possible to put your second and third sentences
>into the middle voice, for the purpose of topicalizing the dog, or emphasizing
>the agency of "you" or "she".
Actually, in these cases, I don't think so. By nature, the action of "SEEing"
is a passive one and the action of "EXAMINing" is an active one. I don't know,
but it may well be possible for other kinds of verbs to be rendered in the
middle voice. It's a matter of perspective, as the phiosophers say: for the
first person, the image of the dog comes into the windows of the eyes unbidden;
but on the other hand, it is known for a fact that the
> Is there a corresponding valence-changing operation for the first
> sentence—i.e. a sort of "antipassive"?
Can you rephrase that? I'm not quite sure what "valence-chaning operation"
entails. I know I've heard of it here before! It's a matter of deleting the
logical object (the dog) and shifting the logical agent (me) into that position
and also change that agent's ending. If so, I think that would basically yield
something like "ku-mue-Co sme-ssue": "I get myself seen". But that doesn't
quite sound right... We just want to end up with "I see", right?
This would be used "on top of" the middle-voice marking, and would have the
function of topicalizing the first person, and emphasizing the patiency of the
dog.
Interesting...
>For that matter, now that I think of it, it looks like what you have is really
>a kind of (incipient?) split ergativity! Specifically, the split occurs along
>the person hierarchy (what you have glossed as "abl" in the first sentence
>would thus be [in this context] an ergative marker—indeed ergative markers do
>often arise out of ablatives/instrumentals).
Split ergativity is fun! It looks like the split here might actually be
"certain verbal domains" rather than person or animacy or anything like that.
This split happens with verbs like see, sense, touch, taste, hear, visualise,
come to realise; maybe even certain emotional verbs like fear, avenge,
nauseate, etc. Purely non-perception / non-emotional verbs (hit, strike, talk
to, bully, fight, harvest, hunt, etc) conjugate very much like we'd expect from
nom-acc languages: the subject / agent is in the nom, the object / patient is
in the acc. The passive causes an inversion as one might expect.
>This may be the better way of analyzing your system—though I don't know how
>common it is for split ergativity to go by person (usually it goes by animacy).
Thanks for the suggestions!
Padraic
>Siva
>
>On 12 October 2013 at 23:37:47, Padraic Brown (elemti...@yahoo.com) wrote:
>So, there is in the farthest reaches of Alaria beyond the seas a language with
>what
>>I think is an interesting sort of verbal conjugation. First, the examples, in
>>this case,
>>the verb "see":
>>
>>First person:
>>hmang-Tan-Co sme-ssue-Ti ku-mue-te
>>dog-A-ref see-MID-3.s.pr me-A-abl
>>
>>The dog gets himself into view by me (masc).
>>---------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Second person:
>>ũm-dang-so saman-Ø-ni un-g-hmang-Tan-sum
>>thou-A-nom examine-Ø-2.s.pr to-lias-dog-A-acc
>>
>>You (slave) examine to the dog.
>>----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>Third person:
>>lĩ-Tan-so ilt saman-Ø-ni un-g-hmang-Tan-sum
>>one-A-nom that examine-Ø-2.s.pr to-lias-dog-A-acc
>>
>>She examines to the dog.
>>--------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>hmang = dog (any major species of wild, domestic or semi-domesticated)
>>sme- = "it comes into view"
>>saman- = "thoroughly examine"; "pick apart"
>>
>>A = animacy ranking (there are seven, all together, both inherent and
>>momentary)
>>MID = middle voice
>>Ø = active voice is unmarked default
>>abl = ablative case
>>nom = nominative case
>>acc = accusative case
>>ref = referential case
>>lias = an intrusive consonant
>>This example is in the unmarked/default "ongoing present". There is also
>>a (marked) "momentary present".
>>
>>As you can see, and this is also the case for all other verbs of perception,
>>the first person forms are conjugated in the middle with respect to the
>>referent and with a "passive" root verb; while the second and third
>>persons are conjugated in the active with respect to the subject and with
>>an entirely different, "active" root verb.
>>
>>It got me wondering if there is any ANADEW for this kind of conjugation:
>>one conceptual map for one person and then using an entirely different
>>conceptual map for the other person(s), and entirely different verbs for
>>both. The distinction here being one of detached, almost impersonal
>>experience
>>(for the first person) vs. a more hands on, almost violent engagement with
>>the
>>object in question (for the second and third persons).
>>
>>Padraic
>>
>
>
Messages in this topic (37)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. verb-less language, maybe
Posted by: "qiihoskeh" qiihos...@gmail.com
Date: Sun Oct 13, 2013 6:02 am ((PDT))
Note: the English translations are very approximate.
I've been working on a possibly verb-less language. Verb roots appear only as
derived nouns (action nominals and participant nominals), so the only clauses
are Subject-Complement, where both subject and complement are noun phrases.
There's no copula. Nominative is used for both subject and complement while
genitive is used for possessors. Since the object of a noun must be expressed
as a possessor, there's no accusative case. There are also dative,
instrumental, and adverbial cases, since these can be used with nominal hosts.
As an example, for "John reads books" one says "John is a reader of books"
(John-Nom book-NR-Gen reader-NR-Nom).
Actually, -Nom = 0 and -NR (non-referential) = 0, so these could be left out
(John book-Gen reader). The other cases and determiners are enclitic, appearing
at the end of the phrase.
Basic clauses are semantically habitual (or sometimes gnomic). To change this,
a couple strategies are used. First, there are the temporal adverbs. Placing
"now" at the end makes the clause present progressive or stative and "then"
makes it non-present progressive or stative.
John book-DefS-Gen reader then. "John was/will be reading the book."
The other strategy is to use an auxiliary. The content word changes from a
participant nominal (such as agent or patient) to an action nominal. Its
subject must take either the instrumental case (for agents) or the genitive
case (for patients). The auxiliary is the inanimate patient of "remember" for
past time or "predict" for future time. The determiner on the action nominal
determines whether the action occurs (singular) once or multiple times (plural)
and which set of aspects is intended. Specifically, definite indicates either
aoristic or progressive or stative while indefinite indicates perfect (with
remember) or prospective (with predict).
Tom-Ins running-DefS somethingremembered. "Tom ran or was running."
Tom-Ins running-IndS somethingremembered. "Tom has run."
Tom-Ins running-IndP somethingremembered. "Tom used to run." (literally, "Some
runnings by Tom are remembered.")
The two strategies can be combined for compound tenses.
Tom-Ins running-IndS somethingpredicted then. "Tom was going to run."
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://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
