------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: OT Caution!! IRA funding
From: Chris Bates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: Further language development Q's
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: Further language development Q's
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Classical Latin Radio
From: Christian Thalmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: tongue twisters
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and leaves
From: Christophe Grandsire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: tongue twisters
From: Christian Thalmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
From: "Douglas Koller, Latin & French" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: OT Caution!! IRA funding (was: English word order and bumper stickers
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Writing Grammatical Rules for Conlangs in the Conlang itself
From: Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
From: "I. K. Peylough" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
From: Arthaey Angosii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: LaTeX for Conlangers -- Question posted
From: Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
From: Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Conlang Flag: Voting Now Open.
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. Interdental fricatives and affricates (Lisp)
From: Caleb Hines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Re: Interdental fricatives and affricates (Lisp)
From: "James W." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Interdental fricatives and affricates (Lisp)
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: Writing Grammatical Rules for Conlangs in the Conlang itself
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:19:30 +0100
From: Chris Bates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT Caution!! IRA funding
>The only deliberate Govt-sponsored terroristic activities (that I can think
>of in recent years) would be Guatemala, and our Contra affair in Nicaragua.
>Of the former, most Americans have been and remain blissfully unaware; the
>latter was so hopelessly mis-managed and corrupt (not to say wrong) that the
>people and even Congress eventually rose up in revulsion.
>
>
>
I have to say that this is untrue. One of the most ironic things about
the US government's crusade against terrorism is that by any fair
definition of the word (no word games, no "counter-terrorism" etc to
hide what it really is) the US is one of the world's biggest terrorist
states. Not that the UK government doesn't do similar things at times,
along with the French etc.. but the US is in the lead by a long way. I
suspect that the US government would try to argue that their blowing
things and people up was for a good cause, but then again I'm sure the
palestinians, the israelies, the iranians, the syrians, and just about
everyone else would argue the same thing. Unfortunately the right thing
depends on your point of view. :)
>If a nation is going to aspire in any way to some kind of imperial hegemony,
>stupid mistakes are going to occur, even with the most benign of motives.
>Deliberate evil is somewhat rarer, isn't it?
>The British Empire, the Russian, the French, the Spanish, the Ottoman...the
>Roman...have I left anyone out?
>
>
>
Very few people think what they are doing is evil. Most of the Nazis
thought they were doing what was right for their people, the same with
the British soldiers who put people in some of the first concentrations
camps, opened fire on peacefully protesting civilians in Indian etc in
the days of our empire. Everyone thinks they're on the right side, and
its so easy to rationalize any act when you think that your goals are
good. Until everyone agrees that the end doesn't always justify the
means (which in practice is never) things will always be the same.
>>The word "America", in
>>this context, was almost universally taken by Americans to mean "the
>>American government", whereas it was almost universally taken by
>>non-Americans to mean "the American populace".
>>
>>
>>
>Well, as you see, I fall into the first category; I'm truly surprised at the
>second-- everything one hears, even from the Arab world nowadays, certainly
>suggests to me that non-Americans are quite capable of distinguishing the
>two, indeed eager to do so.
>
>
I differentiate the two in thought, but not always in speech, depending
upon whether the context makes it clear or not. If I'm confident people
will know which I mean, I will just say "America". And yes, I have said
before that "America was funding the IRA", by which I meant part of the
american people, not the american government itself. One of the few
troubled areas where they weren't sponsoring terrorism. :)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:53:32 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Further language development Q's
John Cowan wrote:
> Carsten Becker scripsit:
> > Hey!
> > 1) How can I get from [4] to /R/, i.e. [X, R]?
>
> Because they are perceptually similar, this can happen in a single
> generation. A child hears [4], produces [R], and is accepted;
> the innovation spreads until everyone is doing it.
>
IIRC Dirk Elzinga or Tom Wier has pointed out that "rhotics" of all types
cause similar changes in the formants of the vowels.
I wonder if the reverse change, from (consonantal) G, R or X > r is widely
attested? It's posited in the history of the Austronesian languages (*G >
/r/ in many), though the pronunciation of *G is simply assumed from the
various reflexes-- r, g, h/0 and some others.
The claim is often made (I just read it in a recent article) that the change
[r] > [R] spread from the French court in the 18th C. to, in particular, the
German and Russian courts, thence eventually to the populace in general (or
most of it, anyway).
It has to be due to such extrinsic and relatively sudden factors, since
there is no way you can chart a purely _articulatory_ pathway from [r] to
[R], as you can, say, for the change [p] > P/f > h > 0 or others.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:08:35 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Further language development Q's
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 19:31:48 +0200, Carsten Becker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) How can I get from [4] to /R/, i.e. [X, R]? [4] is
> alveolar, and /R/ uvular, so at the opposite end of
> the mouth. Are there any steps in between that justify
> this change? OTOH, I've heard dialects that use [4]
> instead of [R]. I've learnt that it's always dialects
> that develop into another daughter languages.
The thing about rhotics (indeed, is this the defining thing about them? If
so, it seems a bit circular) is that they all tend to be perceptually
considered rhotic, regardless of articulatory method. My guess for a very
plausible method of moving from /4/ to /R/ would be an areal effect from
neighboring languages. Other than that, I can see...
4 -> r\ -> z` -> j\ -> G -> R
...as being something that might happen, though I suspect there would
still have to be an external influence to trigger 4 -> r\ and probably z`
-> j\.
> 3) OFF-TOPIC as for the topic of this thread, but ON-TOPIC
> as for languages: What does "deictic" mean? I haven't
> found it in my dictionary.
When in doubt, reach for Trask:
deictic /'daIktIk/ n. Any lexical or grammatical item which serves to
express a distinction within a deictic category, such as a personal
pronoun, a demonstrative, a tense marking or an adverb like 'here' and
'then'.
deictic category n. Any grammatical category which serves to express
distinctions in terms of orientation within the immediate context of an
utterance. Deictic categories are those which make crucial reference to
such factors as the time or place of speaking or the identity or location
of the speaker, the addressee or other entities. Among the most frequent
deictic categories are person, tense and deictic position.
deictic position n. A grammatical category ocurring in perhaps all
languages which serves to express distinctions of reference, particularly
with respect to location. Deictic systems are almost always egocentric --
that is, they express location primarily with reference to the speaker,
though they may secondarily include reference to the addressee or to other
entities. Deictic systems always include reference to distance, though
they may also involve reference to other dimensions, such as direction,
visibility, size, motion or previous mention. [snip numerous examples from
English, Spanish, Japanese, Malagasy, Dyirbal and Eskimo]
deixis /'daIksIs/ n. Reference by a term forming part of a system
expressing a deictic category: 'you', 'now', 'there', 'this' or a
past-tense marker. Adj. deictic.
Phew. A lot of information, but as usual for Trask, relatively clear. I
hope.
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:16:38 +0200
From: Christian Thalmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Classical Latin Radio
Coooool... they do a good job with vowel length, but
the v and ae are mispronounced. I even hear a glottal
stop every once in a while. The Finnish accent is also
quite prominent.
http://www.yleradio1.fi/zgo.php?z=20031213131686314670
-- Christian Thalmann
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:14:27 -0400
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: tongue twisters
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 13:20:30 -0400, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 02:30:10AM -0400, J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
>> Perhaps you have not tongue twisters in a narrow sense but just sentences
>> that are particularly difficult to pronounce, e.g. the following in my
>> natlang:
>
>Huh. There is a word |z| in your 'lect of German? I thought vowelless words
>were a peculiarity of Slavic and Semitic languages.
There's also |d| [t], a definite article.
These are the only vowelless words (well, [ts] is actually three different
words, either article |ds|, preposition |z| 'to' or modificator of
adjectives |z| 'too'). There are other words that often lose their vowel,
like English _is_.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
j. 'mach' wust
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:58:06 +0200
From: Christophe Grandsire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and leaves
Well, I've read everything now. It seems it's impossible to even dare
criticise the US in any way without being accused of bias, unthought
actions, anti-Americanism, etc... Some people found it even necessary to
harass me by private email. Since it seems now impossible to state some
things that for some reason don't fit other people's view of the world, I
don't see a reason why I should stay here any longer. I never accepted to
be treated that way when I know I'm right, and I'm not gonna begin now.
As for "proving" what I'm saying, I'm not gonna take the effort and time to
check where I read what I read (I have other things in my mind right now,
not everything I read comes from the Internet, and I don't carry a list of
my sources in my pocket), especially since it's already clear that even if
I gave a source, it would be automatically attacked as being necessarily
biased (paraphrasing one of the mails I received). Somehow, it seems
everything American has become holy and untouchable. I don't talk to an
audience which is unwilling to listen.
As I said, I have other things on my mind. I'm again without a job, after
nearly being fired due to false accusations from my boss (which I've proven
wrong, but the only result is that instead of being fired immediately, my
contract is just not lengthened). So you can understand that I have better
things to do than being accused of dishonesty. Once a month is enough.
With that, good bye everyone. It was fun for a while, but the best things
always have an end...
Christophe Grandsire.
http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
You need a straight mind to invent a twisted conlang.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 20:58:50 -0000
From: Christian Thalmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: tongue twisters
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Der Papscht het z Spiez ds Bsteck z sp�t bstellt
> /tr p:a:pSt hEt ts [EMAIL PROTECTED] ts pStEqX ts Sp&:t pStEwt:/
> the pope has in Spiez the cutlery too late ordered
> 'the pope has ordered the cutlery too late in Spiez'
Hehe, over here, they say "s Sp�ckbsteck", the
bacon cutlery. Of course, in real speech, we
(at least I) would assimilate some of the
particularly twisty points, e.g. /ts [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ >
[EMAIL PROTECTED], /ts SpA:t/ > [tSpA:t].
One of the most difficult and all the while most
Haikuesquely elegant tongue twister I know
remains
"Blaukraut bleibt Blaukraut,
Brautkleid bleibt Brautkleid."
['blawkRawt blajpt 'blawkRawt]
['bRawtklajt blajpt 'bRawtklajt]
It could be extended with other similar words
like "breit", "klaut" etc, but the symmetry and
succinctness would suffer.
-- Christian Thalmann
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:08:30 EDT
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
Rodlox wrote:
<< Assume that, tomorrow or the next day, you either encounter or create a
(con)language which has the following features:
* Indo-European word order.
* Semitic grammatical rules.
* Sino-Altaic phenomes.>>
I'd like to tentatively suggest that this is not the best way to go about
creating
a language that you want to look like the above. If you wanted it to
actually
be an *a posteriori* language with these characteristics (note: "a
posteriori" means
that the vocabulary is derived from real languages. "A priori" means that
it's
created out of thin air. Examples of "a priori" languages would be all of
mine;
examples of "a posteriori" languages would be a language like all the
languages
in the Romance rings in the relay), then this is the situation you would have
to
simulate:
(1) An IE group moves into a place where a Semitic language is spoken and
sets
up something like a plantation, where they're the kind of "conquerors", or
something. They take those who speak the Semitic language as their slaves
and
a creole develops over time.
(2) After awhile, the creole speakers overthrow the IE group, and the creole
becomes the dominant language in the area. This group becomes economically
powerful, and begins to do business with the world (or something).
(3) The creole speakers develop relations with a Sino-Altaic group. The
Sino-Altaic
group learns the creole.
And there you go. You can avoid the first step, though, because there's
little difference
between IE word order and Semitic word order except for which one is most
common
(IE is *usually* thought of as SOV, but there are plenty of SVO and a few
VSO; Semitic
is *usually* thought of as VSO, but there are plenty of SVO, and I think I
know of a SOV
one, but maybe not). Plus, word order is so ephemeral. Why not just
decide on what
word order you want?
The only *dominant* word order I can recall seeing is SOV--where everything
is head-
final: Verb at the end of a sentence; noun at the end of a string of
adjectives; possessed
after the possessor; relative clauses occurring before the main clause.
This is like Japanese
and Turkish. The rest of the word orders all seem to flirt with other
orders. Here's are
some examples:
(1) I am happy. (SVO)
(2) Am I happy? (VSO)
(3) That's *what I want*. (OSV)
English is a dominant SVO language, but it varies word orders in certain
contexts. VSO
languages commonly form questions (this is what I've heard, not what I've
experienced)
by flipping the verb and subject. So if "Saw I a dog" is the norm, then "I
saw a dog?" would
be the question form.
SOV languages are pretty stable, but what if an auxiliary system is put in
place? This is what
happened with German (right?). German was an SOV language, but it began
using auxiliaries
so regularly that the second position became associated with inflection.
German word order
(in main clauses) can almost be thought of as STOV, where the T stands for
"tense". So here's
an example from one of my languages. It's dominantly SOV. Here's a
sentence:
sexa jeldabanar uslar.
/man-NOM. apple-ACC. eat-PAST/
"The man ate an apple."
Now, the idea is rediculous to me, but what if for some reason the verb "to
be" started being
used as the auxiliary form of the present progressive? It would have to
take the tense, and
the verb would most likely become the direct object. That would leave us
with this:
sexa usalar jeldabanuf mekler.
/man-NOM. eating-ACC. apple-GEN. to be-PAST/
"The man was eating an apple."
Now what you've got is a bizarre word order that looks like SVOT. In other
words, all the tense
information is at the end, where the verb used to be, and the verb is a kind
of nominal verb. The
apple, while now in the genitive case, is still the logical object of "eat".
Now one feature of Zhyler (that's the name of my language) that does exist is
that the verb "to
be" tends to drop out when it's not necessary. In that way, you might get
this:
sexa usalar jeldabanuf.
/man-NOM. eating-ACC. apple-GEN./
"The man was eating an apple."
And even though the /-lar/ ending above is a nominal ending plus the
accusative, it
looks exactly like the past tense ending. So this sentence could be
reanalyzed as:
sexa usalar jeldabanuf.
/man-NOM. eat-PAST. apple-GEN./
"The man was eating/ate an apple."
And voila: The word order of a dominantly SOV language has changed.
The point of this is to show you that it's relatively meaningless to say that
a language has Indo-European word order. Why not just choose a word
order you like an go from there?
The same holds true for phonemes. If you like the phonemic inventory of
a particular Sino-Altaic language, you can always borrow it over, or borrow
it over and change it a little bit. You can do whatever you want. Same
holds
true for grammar. Also, the term "Semitic grammar" is *really* broad.
I've
studied Arabic and Ancient Egyptian, and let me tell you, they're night and
day--and even those two are more closely related than some of the Ethiopian
Semitic languages.
What probably has happened is that you've found a set of sounds you like and
a set of grammatical phenomena you like. Why not build a language based on
those phenomena, and nothing else--see where it takes you?
-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
-Jim Morrison
http://dedalvs.free.fr/
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:30:06 -0400
From: "Douglas Koller, Latin & French" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
Christophe a �crit:
>With that, good bye everyone. It was fun for a while, but the best things
>always have an end...
Tu nous manqueras. Bonne chance avec le boulot.
Kou
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 23:14:33 +0100
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> With that, good bye everyone. It was fun for a while, but the best things
> always have an end...
Good luck, dude. And come back as soon as you can.
--
Keith Gaughan -- talideon.com
The man who removes a mountain begins by carrying away small stones.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:11:32 -0600
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 18:35:48 +0200, Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please bear with me for a moment, as your reply to this will greatly expand
> my understanding of language groups & language evolution...
>
> Assume that, tomorrow or the next day, you either encounter or create a
> (con)language which has the following features:
> * Indo-European word order.
> * Semitic grammatical rules.
> * Sino-Altaic phenomes.
>
> into which group would you classify it, however tenatively?
Mainstreamly, you wouldn't.
For an example, you have Japanese, which has been observed to have, roughly:
* Altaic grammatical rules
* Austronesian phonology
[I'm not sure a compelling argument for the familial relationship of one language to
another can be made by word order.]
As mentioned elsewhere, it's the roots of a language that generally are the best
indicator of its genetic relationship. In the case of Japanese, there isn't much
widely-accepted evidence for its basic roots belonging to any family, so mainstreamly
it is unclassified. (I lean towards the Altaic hypothesis.)
Sometimes the situation is more complicated still, as in the case of pidgins and
creoles (which Japanese has also occasionally been accused of being).
> also, which of those (rules/phenomes/order/other) is most prone to change
> through time? which is least prone to change?
Everything changes, I'm not sure at what rate though. As far as lexical items go, I
understand that verbal morphology is the least likely to be borrowed; so if you have
verbal morphology, it's most likely to be original to the language--or at the very
least, nativized before grammaticalization.
*Muke!
--
website: http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt: http://kohath.deviantart.com/
FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 18:12:55 -0400
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT Caution!! IRA funding (was: English word order and bumper stickers
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 14:43:50 -0400, Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Admittedly a sensitive topic....
>
>Adrian wrote:
>
>>The word "America", in
>> this context, was almost universally taken by Americans to mean "the
>> American government", whereas it was almost universally taken by
>> non-Americans to mean "the American populace".
>>
>Well, as you see, I fall into the first category; I'm truly surprised at the
>second-- everything one hears, even from the Arab world nowadays, certainly
>suggests to me that non-Americans are quite capable of distinguishing the
>two, indeed eager to do so.
As far as my experience reaches (little parts of Switzerland), many if not
most won't distinguish between American government and American people, just
as they won't distinguish between Israeli government and Israeli people
etc., and even among educated people. The only reason why I dare to think
that I'm a little better than this is that I have close contact to people
who have suffered a lot from such indiscrimination: US-Americans and Germans.
Personally, I try not to use the words America(n) except for referring to
the continent as a whole, even though this is unusual.
It's strange how names of countries are formed. Sometimes, the place name
adopted for the country may have been used for the whole area of that
country (Australia), sometimes only for a part (England, Holland). However,
it seems very strange to me that the name of a continent has become the name
of a single country.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
j. 'mach' wust
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 15:52:31 -0700
From: Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Writing Grammatical Rules for Conlangs in the Conlang itself
Has anyone currently on the list tried to write
grammatical texts about the grammar of your conlangs
using the conlang itself?
I know this has been done before. And I've just
started something about it in Silindion.
The following is how to form the passive
participle, in a very succinctly written Silindion
grammatical teatise. Much its succinctness derives
from the slightly unusual use of the benefactive
suffix -nur to indicate "for the use of" (an extension
of its usual meaning "in support of, for the sake of,
etc". Also unusual is the use of the words for letters
(ara, ana, ada, etc.). In this text they're used to
indicate that a verb *ends* in these letters. The word
"minyate" "double" is used to mean "cluster of two".
Which is a technical use of the word. Finally, the
text is unusual in creating words out of suffixes,
such that "de" a suffix, is treated as an ay-stem
noun.
The full text in English is:
"In order to form the passive part (of verbs), there
are five endings "n�, �, d�, t�, r�". "N�" is for use
with verbs in "r". "�" is for use with verb in
labials, dentals, gutturals and clusters of two
consonants. (The following) sound changes (occur):
Gutturals become "nk" or "ng" (before the ending).
Labials become "mp" or "mb" (before the ending). But
as for "m" (it becomes) "mm" (before the ending). "T�"
is used with sibilants.
ETC. ETC. you get the point :)
Here it is in Silindion:
1.1 kesemari nekess�a fantanu
kesema-ri nekessea fanta-nu
division-GEN. patient making-DAT
vonto �o dor� vossa, n�, �, d�, t�, r�
vo-nto �o dora-i vossa, n�, �, d�, t�, r�
exist-3pl five ending-pl i.e. n�, �, d�, t�, r�
1.2 n� ara-nur
ne "r"-BENEFACTIVE
1.3a � sambivanur, tanievamma, urd�avamma, minyat�amma
� sambiva-nur, tanieva-mma, urd�ava-mma, minyat�-amma
� labial-BEN, dental-COMM, guttural-COMM,
double-COMM.
1.3b veska lisseiri:
veska liss�-ri
change sound-GEN.
1.3c yassar urd�ava anki mino angi
yass-a-r urd�ava ank-i mino ang-i
become-PRS-3s guttural "nk"-ESS. or "ng"-ESS.
1.3d yassar sambiva ampi mino ambi
yass-a-r sambiva amp-i mino amb-i
become-PRS-3s labial "mp"-ESS. or "mb"-ESS.
n� amatma ammi
n� ama-tma amm-i
and "m"-REL."mm"-ESS.
1.4 t� siskanur
t� siska-nur
t� hissing-BEN.
Elliott LAsh
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 19:04:16 -0400
From: "I. K. Peylough" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:58:06 +0200, Christophe Grandsire
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Well, I've read everything now. It seems it's impossible to even dare
>criticise the US in any way without being accused of bias, unthought
>actions, anti-Americanism, etc... Some people found it even necessary to
>harass me by private email.
Don't know if you still subscribed, but ... Either I missed something or
you're referring to off-list events??? <sententious>Sometimes it's best to
save the can of worms for a special occasion, with just the right company
present.</sententious>
> Since it seems now impossible to state some
>things that for some reason don't fit other people's view of the world,
I've been having that problem too.
>I don't see a reason why I should stay here any longer. I never accepted
>to be treated that way when I know I'm right, and I'm not gonna begin now.
>As for "proving" what I'm saying, I'm not gonna take the effort and time to
>check where I read what I read (I have other things in my mind right now,
>not everything I read comes from the Internet, and I don't carry a list of
>my sources in my pocket), especially since it's already clear that even if
>I gave a source, it would be automatically attacked as being necessarily
>biased (paraphrasing one of the mails I received). Somehow, it seems
>everything American has become holy and untouchable. I don't talk to an
>audience which is unwilling to listen.
I don't know what you said, but just consider how it would go for someone
in the US who said the same. Are you familiar with the Beatles tune that
mentions Miami Beach and BOAC?
>As I said, I have other things on my mind. I'm again without a job, after
>nearly being fired due to false accusations from my boss (which I've proven
>wrong, but the only result is that instead of being fired immediately, my
>contract is just not lengthened). So you can understand that I have better
>things to do than being accused of dishonesty. Once a month is enough.
>
>With that, good bye everyone. It was fun for a while, but the best things
>always have an end...
Unfortunately, I myself am reminded of that quite often.
Best wishes,
I
>Christophe Grandsire.
>
>http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
>
>You need a straight mind to invent a twisted conlang.
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 19:37:36 -0400
From: Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 17:08:30 -0400 (EDT), David Peterson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (3) That's *what I want*. (OSV)
Arguably, (3) is SVO, with O as a subclause and OSV in that subclause.
That is (what I want)
S V O
O S V
Hold on. The asterisks probably bracket the OSV bit you were talking
about, don't they?
Oh, well, there goes another post from my quota...
Paul
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 16:58:56 -0700
From: Arthaey Angosii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
> With that, good bye everyone. It was fun for a while, but the best things
> always have an end...
I'm sorry some people have been so mean and thougthless to you. I've
always thought of you as one of CONLANG-L's staples, and I'll miss not
seeing your contributions.
Good luck with everything, and I hope to see you 'round the 'net, if
not on the list.
Hugs,
AA
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 02:45:50 +0200
From: Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LaTeX for Conlangers -- Question posted
Hi!
Sorry for replying late, but I haven't been reading the groups since
quite a while.
Carsten Becker writes:
>Hey!
>
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/latex-for-conlangers/message/503
>I have posted that question already 4 weeks ago, but nobody has answered
>yet. So I just wanted to notify you about that question.
You can assign arbitrary characters to LaTeX commands by doing
something like:
\catcode`X\active
\defX{...}
Replace X with the character you like to assign a command to and
... with its definition.
**Henrik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 21:36:40 +0000
From: Robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The (necessarily anti-American, it seems) French guy salutes you and
leaves
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> With that, good bye everyone. It was fun for a while, but the best things
> always have an end...
>
> Christophe Grandsire.
>
> http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr
>
> You need a straight mind to invent a twisted conlang.
Christophe:
You have always been a good helper to me, and I, as an American by chance not
choice, am appalled by the actions of the few who have attacked you. I hope
you will rethink your leaving. Just remember this long time lurker still
appreciates you.
- Robert Hill
Robir Yil
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)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=F6qN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 12:11:31 +0930
From: "Adrian Morgan (aka Flesh-eating Dragon)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Conlang Flag: Voting Now Open.
It's time to vote!
All submissions are closed. Voting is now open until a week from now.
Designs: http://web.netyp.com/member/dragon/temp/conlangflag.htm
Voting: http://gzarondar.freeserverhost.net/flagvote.php
Adrian.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 22:46:18 -0500
From: Caleb Hines <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Interdental fricatives and affricates (Lisp)
Within the past several months or years, I've slowly come to a startling
conclusion -- I lisp (and I'm not refering to the programming language!). An
interdental lisp to be precise.
Googling for more information, I found that it usually dissapears around the
age of six or so, but I'm 22! Normally, people seem to understand me just
fine, but once in a very rare while there's an embarassing moment when I try
to pronounce /s/, that people have difficulty understanding. Usually around
people that don't know me very well; since I'm not exactly a socializer,
this doesn't happen often.
For instance, a few years ago in college, another student was asking me to
spell my name |Caleb|.
------------
So I replied: /si ?eI ?El ?i bi/.
What was the first letter? /Ti/?
No, /si/!
/Ti/?!
No! /si/! /si/! Like in cat!
------------
At the time, I didn't even know there was a name for it, and like I said,
I'm generally well-understood, but I never knew alot of kids growing up, so
I was never made fun of. But when I started conlanging, I applied what I had
been reading about phonology to analyze what I was actually doing. It's more
complex then just /s/ -> [T], since /s/ and /T/ are distinct phon(em)es for
me (I pronounce them differently). Here's what I found that I do. I'm not
exactly sure if I'm using the right CXS symbols, so bear with me as I
explain (also, I'll be explaining with unvoiced phonemes, but everything
applies equally well to the voiced versions, /z/ and /D/).
I have two allophones for /s/:
/s/ -> [T], [T-], where
[T] -> Interdental fricative (this one is the most common by far)
[T-] -> Postdental fricative (tongue touching the inside bottom of the upper
front teeth, air blown through gap between two front teeth.)
But I _do_ distinguish /T/ from /s/. Here's how -- untill the last few years
(when I started conlanging), I had been under the assumption that /T/ was an
affricate (I didn't know the term, but I knew the concept). I even remember
as a kid, when I first learned that |ch| was actually two sounds, /tS/, I
thought "Oh! and for that matter, soft |th| is basically just /ts/, and hard
|th| is just /dz/". And this is how I still pronounce it, give or take.
/T/ -> [t_mT)], where
[t_m] a laminal alveolar stop. (Tongue blade placed on alv. ridge)
[T] The first phone of /s/ above. (Tongue tip is interdental)
But if /T/ is [tT], then you might be wondering how I pronounce /ts/. Quite
simply like this:
/ts/ -> [t+T-], where
[t+] -> A post-dental stop.
[T-] -> The second phone of /s/ given above.
The tongue sort of slides from being directly behind the top of the teeth in
[t+] to being behind the bottom of the teeth. This exposes the gap between
my front teeth which lets air hiss out to form /s/ -> [T-].
The one combination that really gets me, though, is word-final /Ts/, for
example, in |baths|. This ends up being something like [b&t_mT)T] or even
uglier [b&t_mT)[EMAIL PROTECTED] (remember, [D] is my /z/). It's not so difficult in
the
middle of a word, where I can break the syllable up.
So my question is twofold. First of all, does anyone know how common lisping
is in adults? I coudn't find much at all about adult lisping on Google. And
secondly, how on earth do you pronounce /s/ and /z/ _correctly_???!! Even
though most people understand me well enough, it would be nice to be capable
of making a "true" /s/, even if only in a pinch.
Can thomebody pleadhe help me?
[t_mT)eINkT],
~Caleb
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 23:00:25 -0500
From: "James W." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Interdental fricatives and affricates (Lisp)
On Sep 15, 2004, at 22:46, Caleb Hines wrote:
[snip interesting lisp description]
> So my question is twofold. First of all, does anyone know how common
> lisping
> is in adults? I coudn't find much at all about adult lisping on
> Google. And
> secondly, how on earth do you pronounce /s/ and /z/ _correctly_???!!
> Even
> though most people understand me well enough, it would be nice to be
> capable
> of making a "true" /s/, even if only in a pinch.
>
> Can thomebody pleadhe help me?
>
I don't know about how common lisping is in adults. I do know that my 4
year old lisps
quite a bit (my 7 year old never did, but he was/is not a normal
child...).
Anyway, I pronounce /s/ with the tongue pretty much is the same place
as /t/. The
difference is that /t/ is a stop and /s/ is a fricative. The same goes
for /z/.
My tongue is at the point where the upper teeth and gums meet.
James W.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:16:11 EDT
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
Paul wrote:
<<Hold on. The asterisks probably bracket the OSV bit you were talking
about, don't they?
Oh, well, there goes another post from my quota...>>
Well, just so you don't feel so bad, I'll use a post from my quota to say,
yes, those asterisks were meant to act as brackets. However, that's not
the traditional way to do it, and I probably should've used proper brackets
or explained that that's what the asterisks were for. Next time, I will.
Sorry for the confusion!
-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
-Jim Morrison
http://dedalvs.free.fr/
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:19:55 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Interdental fricatives and affricates (Lisp)
Caleb Hines wrote:
> I have two allophones for /s/:
>
> /s/ -> [T], [T-], where
> [T] -> Interdental fricative (this one is the most common by far)
Really interdental? Your tongue sticks out a little beyond the bottom of the
upper front teeth?? If so, try retracting it so that the tongue tip is in
contact with the inside lower edge of the teeth. That, in my book, is a
proper [T] = /T/ as in thick, thin etc., which in fact is what you describe
next----
> [T-] -> Postdental fricative (tongue touching the inside bottom of the
> upper
> front teeth, air blown through gap between two front teeth.)
Hmm, the problem may be the gap between your teeth. Is it large?
[s] can be pronounced in a variety of ways, one of which was described by
James W. His way, I think, is what we've been calling "apical s"-- the
friction is actually produced between the tongue tip and the alv. ridge or
the upper teeth. That's not the way I do it-- in my case, the tongue tip is
against the upper inside surface of the _lower_ front teeth, with the
friction produced between the blade of the tongue and the alv. ridge (the
sides of the tongue are also pressed quite tightly against the upper
molars-- I think this produces a narrowed groove down the middle of the
tongue, which also causes turbulence), and the air flows down over the back
sides of the upper teeth. (This is also the sound I make when hissing, e.g.
imitating a snake. How would you imitate a snake??)
It could be that the gap in your teeth is allowing too much air to escape,
so that it reduces the amount of friction you can produce in that area.
Consequently your [s] has never been as "hissy" as it ought. And if, when
you were young, nobody called attention to it (which includes teasing,
unfortunately), you simply remained unaware of it and had no incentive to
experiment with other ways of producing it.
There is a bona-fide speech therapist on the List, Dan Sulani. Hopefully
he'll chime in with some professional advice.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 01:32:39 EDT
From: David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Writing Grammatical Rules for Conlangs in the Conlang itself
Elliott wrote:
<< Has anyone currently on the list tried to write
grammatical texts about the grammar of your conlangs
using the conlang itself?>>
You know, for my very first language, I created a whole slew
of grammatical terms. Since then, I haven't. Actually writing
a primer *in* the language is really an interesting matter, because
it ties directly in with culture. I mean, people's perception of
the technical workings of their own language tend to be unexpected.
How they would present it (and is this for teaching to school
children, or to people who don't know the language?) would be
an interesting matter. Plan to put any of it online?
-David
*******************************************************************
"sunly eleSkarez ygralleryf ydZZixelje je ox2mejze."
"No eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn."
-Jim Morrison
http://dedalvs.free.fr/
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 06:58:04 +0100
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ? how would you classify this language ?
On Wednesday, September 15, 2004, at 05:35 , Rodlox wrote:
> Please bear with me for a moment, as your reply to this will greatly
> expand
> my understanding of language groups & language evolution...
>
> Assume that, tomorrow or the next day, you either encounter or create a
> (con)language which has the following features:
> * Indo-European word order.
> * Semitic grammatical rules.
> * Sino-Altaic phenomes.
>
> into which group would you classify it, however tenatively?
I could not even tentatively classify it, I am afraid. I do not understand
two of the criteria & the most important criterion for group
identification is missing.
I want to be helpful but there are problems, of which IMO the more
important are:
What is Indo-European word order?
What are Sino-Altaic phonemes?
Where's the basic vocabulary coming from?
I mention these because:
(a) as Roger wrote on Wednesday, September 15, 2004, at 05:18:
[snip]
> Usually a language is grouped according to where the bulk of the
> _vocabulary_ comes from.
Certainly the basic vocabulary. That's how the 18th & 19th century
linguists identified all the multifarious branches & sub-branches of the
IE languages.
> If the con-vocabulary is completely a priori
> (invented) then you'd just have to say it's "a priori, with X word order,
> Y
> grammar, Z phonemes" (note spelling!).
Indeed you would.
> I'm not sure there's a typical Indo-European word order--
There simply isn't, as the IE languages exist today.
> Proto IE is
> assumed to have been SOV, most of the descendants vary between SOV and
> SVO.
Yep - I agree.
But there are many other variations & some are being noted in mails to the
list.
(b) also on Wednesday, September 15, 2004, at 06:29 , Elliott Lash wrote:
> I believe he meant that most of the descendents have
> either "SOV" or "SVO" orders.
I'm certain he did!
> The Celtic Languages can have SVO or VSO orders, with
> VSO order being the theoretically more prominent
> order....
VSO is the normative (except in Breton where SVO is normative) - but focus
[sic] fronting is very common; then the verb follows the focus. This is
quite unlike German which has topic fronting, with verb following the
topic - at least in main clauses; subordinate clauses are SVO.
Classical Latin was basically SVO, but varied considerably, usually
because of topic fronting and shifting focus to the end.
[snip]
> I think it's safe to say that SOV seems a little more
> prominent in the Older Languages,
Umm - I wouldn't class Modern Persian, Hindi/Urdu & other north Indian
langs as "older"! The SOV order is still strong and alive in the IE family.
> with SVO gaining
> ground in the last thousand or so years.
True of western languages.
So IMO there is no common "Indo-European word order" and different people
are likely to understand different things by this.
The Semitic languages are much more conservative than the IE langs. I've
heard it said that the variation among them is of similar order to that
between the Romancelangs, so you're probably on sounder ground with
"Semitic grammatical rules". But I'll leave that to the Semiticists on the
list.
However, this has bearing on identifying the group. It has often been
observed that there are many apparent similarities between the grammar of
the IE Celtic langs and the Semitic langs (with some wild theories
accounting for this!).
I simply do not understand what you mean by Sino-Altaic phonemes. In any
case, the phoneme inventory is probably the least safe indicator of
grouping.
==========================================================================
[RETURN TO RODLOX'S MAIL & HIS SECOND QUESTION
> also, which of those (rules/phenomes/order/other) is most prone to change
> through time? which is least prone to change?
I'll first quote Roger again:
On Wednesday, September 15, 2004, at 05:18 , Roger Mills wrote:
[snip]
> Most likely: sounds/phonemes, but in fact _everything_ can change, often
> as
> the result of sound changes. Slowest change probably in vocabulary.
I agree the most likely are the sounds. The sounds of the French language,
for example, have changed tremendously from those of Old French. But, in
fact, as everything is liable to change.
Basic vocabulary is, as Roger says, the least likely to change, but
phonetic change can sometimes render the results as unrecognizable. For
example, the Armenian numerals for 1 to 10 below are derived from IE and
are (using CXS):
mek, erku, erek', tS'ors, hing, vets', jot', ut', inn, tas@
Some are vaguely reminiscent maybe of corresponding words in other IE
langs. But phonetic change has 'disguised' many. Who, for example, would
immediately connect _erku_ with PIE *dwo:u still less with our 'two'?
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================
"They are evidently confusing science with technology."
UMBERTO ECO September, 2004
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
