------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
From: Dirk Elzinga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: 2 Re Word order (Was: Conlangs of mischief
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: Another idea for a script for Ayeri
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: 1st, 2nd, 3rd - 4th person POV??
From: Carol Anne Buckley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: 2 Re Word order (Was: Conlangs of mischief
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Proto-Languages Question
From: Rob Haden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
From: Rob Haden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: Proto-Languages Question
From: Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Fijian gender
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Grammar sketchlang - improving?
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: Number/Specificality/Archetypes in Language
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: Fijian gender
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: Fijian gender
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: Fijian gender
From: "B. Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: Fijian gender
From: "Ph. D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: Fijian gender
From: Carol Anne Buckley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
From: Mike Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. apology
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: Fijian gender
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Orthography help, please.
From: bob thornton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: Spanish-related question ((q)SVO ?):question words
From: John Leland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: Alternative LIfestyles: Deuteronomic Curse
From: John Leland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 12:58:00 -0600
From: Dirk Elzinga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
On Sep 24, 2004, at 12:20 PM, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Suppose you could go back in time to when Proto-Indo-European
> was spoken in the Caucasus or wherever we think it was these days.
> Would a quick trip down to the Middle East find a culture of people
> speaking Proto-Afroasiatic at the same time? And what would the
> people in Eastern Asia be speaking at this point?
>
> Presumably there wouldn't be anyone at all in the Americas yet . . .
The relative dating I've heard places PIE at 5000-6000 years BP and
Proto-Afro-Asiatic at 8000-10,000 years BP, so no, they weren't
contemporaneous.
In the Americas, Uto-Aztecan is about as old as PIE. I don't know about
other families, though. The archeological evidence for first settlement
of the Americas is controversial, as I understand it, with some sites
in Brazil being dated to 25,000-30,000 years BP. But not being an
archeologist, I don't know what to think about that.
Dirk
--
Dirk Elzinga
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"I believe that phonology is superior to music. It is more variable and
its pecuniary possibilities are far greater." - Erik Satie
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:35:21 -0600
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2 Re Word order (Was: Conlangs of mischief
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:39:37 EDT, David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rodlox wrote:
>
> <<>Nevertheless, I'd like to see more explanation for how compound words
> are formed, for example. I think part of the reason it looks so odd is
> because there's little or no description of how this process actually
> works
> at-�� =� To go; a year
> au-�� =� To perceive
> attau =� to perceive {understand} a year {calendrical signifigance}>>
>
> This still doesn't make any sense to me, I'm afraid. First of all, if you
> have one word, and one definition is "to go", and the other definition is "a
> year", then what you have is two different words that have the same sound, like
> "bank (of a river)" and "bank (that you keep your money in)". As such, they
> should be listed separately.
Actually this *at- and *au- appear to be their homophonous Indoeuropean roots. *at-
is indeed often glossed with both "go" and "year" ("year" here to be understood as
going through the cycle of seasons, I suppose). The Latin reflex is _annus_ (<
*at-no-).
*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: 3
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 21:14:40 +0200
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another idea for a script for Ayeri
J. 'Mach' Wust wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 17:56:34 +0200, Carsten Becker
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>Hey!
>>
>>I've come up with another script for my conlang Ayeri
>>recently. I couldn't stand the Javanese-like script anymore
>>because everything looked far too similar and was
>>unnececerilly complicated in some ways. The latest idea is
>>a script that can be quite easily carved into stone or
>>wood, that's why it has some kind of runic character. I was
>>basically "inspired" by (read "I stole shapes from") Latin,
>>Cyrillic, Tamil, Tengwar(?). Because I still have no
>>scanner, I made a TTF font (not online yet) and wrote a PDF
>>document (with OOO under Linux :-)) ) of the description:
>>www.beckerscarsten.de/conlang/ayeri/ayerialphabet.pdf
>><http://www.beckerscarsten.de/conlang/ayeri/ayerialphabet.pdf>
>
>
> Nice script! Looks as if it could be evolved into a cursive version (in some
> centuries).
>
> I don't think that the forms you show is very suited to be carved on wood
> due to the many right angles and the narrow parallels. I imagine that they
> use another variant for wood carving.
Have a look at Tibetan script for a hint at how it might
develop into something more hand-written!
--
/BP 8^)
--
B.Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
(Tacitus)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 15:42:08 -0400
From: Carol Anne Buckley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 1st, 2nd, 3rd - 4th person POV??
Hi, nice to meet you;
I'll be danged if I know why your reply went straight to me. For some reason I get
the conlang list on two different email accounts, too. I am going to have to fix
that.
Thanks about the dot-slash. Hopefully most everyone on the list is smart enough to
figure that out.
C.
----- Original Message -----
From: David Peterson
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: 1st, 2nd, 3rd - 4th person POV??
Carol wrote:
<<I'm new! I have been lurking for a few days. I have a BA in Linguistics
and Cognitive Psych and an MA in Linguistics (emphasis on Oceanic languages)
and am interested in language in general and Polynesian languages in
particular. I write futurist fiction (as yet unpublished). >>
Welcome, Carol. In a year's time Ihope to be exactly in the same
place (only with "English" in place of "Cognitive Psych" above, and
the word "futurist" deleted). I started a language with the idea of
making it Polynesian, but then it went its own way:
http://dedalvs.free.fr/kamakawi/
Incidentally, your url should have a dot where there's a slash:
www.sff.net/people/buckley
Oh, also, when I hit reply it went straight to you, and not to the
list. I know there's a way to fix this, but I'm not sure how... :(
-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: 5
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:43:58 -0600
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2 Re Word order (Was: Conlangs of mischief
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 21:40:11 +0200, Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (initially, I was puzzled...most of Proto-Indo-European seemed to be
> prefixes (what with alll the - at- the- end- of- words- ).
Those aren't words or prefixes, but stems that endings must attach to.
To make a parallel example from a natural language, one could make a Latin entry
_gaud-_ "rejoice", covering all derivatives such as _gaudeo_ "rejoice", _gaudium_
"joy" etc. but also with the hyphen to note that _gaud_ itself is not a word.
*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: 6
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:04:57 -0400
From: Rob Haden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Proto-Languages Question
On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:55:43 -0700, Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Hello All,
>
> Well, I have 4 main related languages, as some of you
>may know: Classical Nindic, West Nindic (Hinession),
>Silindion and Essamea. The entire family is called
>Silinestic.
>
>
> Classic Nindic and Hinession form what is known as
>the Northern Nindic branch of Nindic a sub-branch of
>Silinestic. The other language is South Nindic, which
>forms the Southern Nindic branch.
>
> Silindion and Essamea, along with two others,
>Lannelka and South Silic (which are not so defined)
>form the Silic sub-branch of Silinestic.
>
> They all use the same roots and from them derive many
>identical or similar words. The grammar of all the
>languages is derived from the common source, but tends
>to go in different directions, as you might suspect.
>The problem I'm having is...knowing the grammar of all
>the daughter's, I'm not too certain about what the
>definitive grammar of Silinestic is. I'll give an
>example, to hopefully show what I mean.
>
>"He gave sharp swords and broad shields to the hero"
I think it should be "heroes," since you gloss the word as a plural below.
>Hinession:
>N� v�asan n�herchein nechver ha rhesein cas penos da
>l�roeu
It seems like Hinession underwent a second shift in vocabulary.
>Cl. Nindic:
>Ethed naw herch�n ethaen �bo rhedd cath noth i laerwy
It seems that both Cl. Nindic and Hinession actually preserve accusative *-
n. With Cl. Nindic 'rhedd', perhaps the development was *rhredn > *rhedd.
Does 'naw'/'n�' mean "he"?
>Silindion:
>Anel� kir�in sampi rondeimma kasta i lairohyanu
I don't see how 'rondeimma' can be from *rodnoin-naj.
>Essamea:
>Nelsi kiree sikkie nee rendee kasta sinj�nu l�irej�
How can -kk- arise from -pn-?
>Without giving the interlinears for the daughters,
>here is what should be reconstructed as the common
>proto-languages:
>
>Nindic:
>*anta-ti: (o:) sjarski-j itt-ani: emopod roda-j kasta
>give-pst (he) sword-pl bite-prp. and shield-pl broad
>
>nods je la:jros-ja
>unto the hero-pl
If the original genitive was *-di, perhaps 'emopod' preserves it? The
dative preposition 'nods' seems to be able to be analyzed as *nod-s.
Presumably, this metathesized to *nost giving Classical Nindic 'noth'. The
word for "sword" seems to contain an additional -ski element.
>Silic:
>*a-nel-si: kira-j-n sapni naj rodno-j-n kasta
>AUG-give-pst sword-pl-AC sharp and shield-pl-ACC broad
>
>je la:jros-ja=no:d
>the hero-pl-to
>
>The problem I'm having is how to relate the two
>proto-languages into one common Silinestic. It seems
>like the main differences between Silic and Nindic in
>the stages given above are vocabulary based. So I'm
>not sure what the original Silinestic vocabulary might
>have been..at least in this case.
>
>Anyways, what do you all think?
>
> Elliott
One correspondence between Silic and Nindic seems to be S si(:) : N ti(:),
implying assibilation in Silic. Another one is S ki : N sja, implying that
earlier *ki became palatalized with lowering and centralizing of vowel
quality, giving *kja, and then eventually became *sja (cf. Indo-Aryan from
Indo-European). It's possible that N -ani: in 'ittani:' and S -ni (?)
in 'sapni' are related. Perhaps the roots *itt- (source for geminate?) and
*sap- mean "bite" and "cut," respectively. The biggest problem is actually
the verb: Nindic points to *anta-, while Silic points to *nel-. I'm not
sure how these two can be related, besides both containing an /n/.
- Rob
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:10:02 -0400
From: Rob Haden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 14:20:27 -0400, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Suppose you could go back in time to when Proto-Indo-European
>was spoken in the Caucasus or wherever we think it was these days.
>Would a quick trip down to the Middle East find a culture of people
>speaking Proto-Afroasiatic at the same time? And what would the
>people in Eastern Asia be speaking at this point?
>
>Presumably there wouldn't be anyone at all in the Americas yet . . .
The broad range for Proto-Indo-European's existence is between 6000 and
4000 B.C. At this time, Proto-Afroasiatic would have already broken up
into Proto-Semitic and Proto-Hamitic, at least. I have no clue about
Eastern Asia or the Americas, but there would have been people in the
latter for several thousand years, at least.
- Rob
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:21:54 -0400
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Contemporaneous protolanguages
On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 12:58:00PM -0600, Dirk Elzinga wrote:
> The relative dating I've heard places PIE at 5000-6000 years BP and
> Proto-Afro-Asiatic at 8000-10,000 years BP, so no, they weren't
> contemporaneous.
Ah, thank you. Indeed, 5000 years ago they were already speaking what is
recognizably Ancient Egyptian in Egypt, so that would have to be
post-Proto-Afro-Asiatic; I didn't realize PIE was that recent.
Veddy interesting for my conhistorical purposes. Thanks.
> In the Americas, Uto-Aztecan is about as old as PIE. I don't know about
> other families, though. The archeological evidence for first settlement
> of the Americas is controversial, as I understand it, with some sites
> in Brazil being dated to 25,000-30,000 years BP. But not being an
> archeologist, I don't know what to think about that.
Sorry, sorry, I'm an idiot, I was confusing the timing of early civilizations
with that of the proto languages. Of course there were already Americans
5000ben.
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:30:46 -0700
From: Elliott Lash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Proto-Languages Question
I will reply to this on Sunday night or Monday
afternoon, since I have little time right now and I'm
not going to be around over the weekend.
But i liked this post anyways!
Elliott
--- Rob Haden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 21:55:43 -0700, Elliott Lash
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Hello All,
> >
> > Well, I have 4 main related languages, as some of
> you
> >may know: Classical Nindic, West Nindic
> (Hinession),
> >Silindion and Essamea. The entire family is called
> >Silinestic.
> >
> >
> > Classic Nindic and Hinession form what is known as
> >the Northern Nindic branch of Nindic a sub-branch
> of
> >Silinestic. The other language is South Nindic,
> which
> >forms the Southern Nindic branch.
> >
> > Silindion and Essamea, along with two others,
> >Lannelka and South Silic (which are not so defined)
> >form the Silic sub-branch of Silinestic.
> >
> > They all use the same roots and from them derive
> many
> >identical or similar words. The grammar of all the
> >languages is derived from the common source, but
> tends
> >to go in different directions, as you might
> suspect.
> >The problem I'm having is...knowing the grammar of
> all
> >the daughter's, I'm not too certain about what the
> >definitive grammar of Silinestic is. I'll give an
> >example, to hopefully show what I mean.
> >
> >"He gave sharp swords and broad shields to the
> hero"
>
> I think it should be "heroes," since you gloss the
> word as a plural below.
>
> >Hinession:
> >N� v�asan n�herchein nechver ha rhesein cas penos
> da
> >l�roeu
>
> It seems like Hinession underwent a second shift in
> vocabulary.
>
> >Cl. Nindic:
> >Ethed naw herch�n ethaen �bo rhedd cath noth i
> laerwy
>
> It seems that both Cl. Nindic and Hinession actually
> preserve accusative *-
> n. With Cl. Nindic 'rhedd', perhaps the development
> was *rhredn > *rhedd.
> Does 'naw'/'n�' mean "he"?
>
> >Silindion:
> >Anel� kir�in sampi rondeimma kasta i lairohyanu
>
> I don't see how 'rondeimma' can be from
> *rodnoin-naj.
>
> >Essamea:
> >Nelsi kiree sikkie nee rendee kasta sinj�nu l�irej�
>
> How can -kk- arise from -pn-?
>
> >Without giving the interlinears for the daughters,
> >here is what should be reconstructed as the common
> >proto-languages:
> >
> >Nindic:
> >*anta-ti: (o:) sjarski-j itt-ani: emopod roda-j
> kasta
> >give-pst (he) sword-pl bite-prp. and shield-pl
> broad
> >
> >nods je la:jros-ja
> >unto the hero-pl
>
> If the original genitive was *-di, perhaps 'emopod'
> preserves it? The
> dative preposition 'nods' seems to be able to be
> analyzed as *nod-s.
> Presumably, this metathesized to *nost giving
> Classical Nindic 'noth'. The
> word for "sword" seems to contain an additional -ski
> element.
>
> >Silic:
> >*a-nel-si: kira-j-n sapni naj rodno-j-n
> kasta
> >AUG-give-pst sword-pl-AC sharp and shield-pl-ACC
> broad
> >
> >je la:jros-ja=no:d
> >the hero-pl-to
> >
> >The problem I'm having is how to relate the two
> >proto-languages into one common Silinestic. It
> seems
> >like the main differences between Silic and Nindic
> in
> >the stages given above are vocabulary based. So I'm
> >not sure what the original Silinestic vocabulary
> might
> >have been..at least in this case.
> >
> >Anyways, what do you all think?
> >
> > Elliott
>
> One correspondence between Silic and Nindic seems to
> be S si(:) : N ti(:),
> implying assibilation in Silic. Another one is S ki
> : N sja, implying that
> earlier *ki became palatalized with lowering and
> centralizing of vowel
> quality, giving *kja, and then eventually became
> *sja (cf. Indo-Aryan from
> Indo-European). It's possible that N -ani: in
> 'ittani:' and S -ni (?)
> in 'sapni' are related. Perhaps the roots *itt-
> (source for geminate?) and
> *sap- mean "bite" and "cut," respectively. The
> biggest problem is actually
> the verb: Nindic points to *anta-, while Silic
> points to *nel-. I'm not
> sure how these two can be related, besides both
> containing an /n/.
>
> - Rob
>
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today!
http://vote.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 16:43:31 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
Arthaey Angosii wrote:
> > I *really* like your refrigerator magnet idea, Adrian.
SO DO I!!
Not so seriously, if we had an Official Conlang Drink or Hors d'oeuvres we
could decorate them with a little flag on a toothpick...;-))))
I wonder if there's
> > a site that'll do that for you...
>
> * http://www.branders.com/ -- Minimum order of 500 magnets at $0.47
> each, or $235.
>
> * http://www.autoplates.com/magnets.html -- Minimum 500 @ $0.30, or $150.
>
> * http://www.websticker.com/magnets.htm -- Minumum 125, pricing via
> email quotes.
It's hard to tell from those whether they're talking real magnets affixed to
the back of whatever, or the magnetic plastic sheet-like things (e.g.
business cards) that are also popular, and must be cheap because they're
given away en masse. (Right now I'm looking at a Time Mag. thingy that's
63mm x 47; in the golden ratio that would be 63x39-- allowing for errors
:-)) -- a decent size.)
>
> So, in other words, I didn't find any reasonable magnet-makers. I was
> hoping Cafe Press could help out, but they only have circular magnets.
> They d� have rectangular stickers, though:
>
> * http://www.cafepress.com/ -- Minimum 1 @ $2.49 each.
>
> While their prices are much higher per unit, it works out when we want
> so few units total. :) If anyone else finds better deals or new ideas,
> do share!
Could we have an informal count of how many people would want one or more
(give them to friends!!)? ***Email me privately.***
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:15:57 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Fijian gender
Over at the ZBB, during a discussion of (grammatical) gender, this was said:
"There's gender in Fijian ... at least one of them is called "edible" gender
... and like the genders of German, they manifest themselves in the articles
rather than the words themselves. Since Fijian is an isolated member of the
Oceanic family, it's hard to compare it to anything. I don't know how the
Fijian gender system arose."
Anyone have any information on this?
Trebor
...who would like to welcome Carol to the list!
...and say hi to everyone for Daniel Andr�asson who unfortunately doesn't
have enough time for the list nowadays (FWIW, his thesis "Active Languages"
can now be found at his new website: <http://hem.bredband.net/dinajel/> in
the "papers" section)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 00:09:21 +0200
From: Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Grammar sketchlang - improving?
based on ideas in this list...
Possible Glossary for a Conlang...
Pronouns:
| male | female
plains | ien | ine
mountain | i�a | i�
scrub | io�e | o�e
desert | ni� | �in
caves | oe� | oen
coast | ayo� | ay�
lake | a� | a�ea
sea | ana | a�a
Wordlist:
| word | word-as-noun | word-as-verb
landslide | aka-ebe | akayebe | akanebe
smooth | oa-eb |oayneb | oaneb |{note: when the
word ends in a consonant, insert an |n| following the |y|}.
getting better?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:06:46 -0500
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Number/Specificality/Archetypes in Language
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Thomas R. Wier scripsit:
> > He did indeed. Which just goes to show that number agreement in
> > English cannot be purely determined based on either semantics or
> > morphology, since more recent American English has changed in this
> > respect.
>
> I don't think this counts as evidence: the behavior of proper names is
> always going to be lexically idiosyncratic, because some features are
> sealed off whereas others bubble up. [...]
Okay, so then how do you account for the count/mass noun distinction,
or pluralia tanta? In English, there is no way to predict why, e.g.,
"lettuce" is a mass noun and "scissors" are pluralia tantum, but
something like "army" is countable and has both singular and plural
forms. The "United States is" is just part of a larger phenomenon,
and happens to be proper as well.
> > It's possible that all lexical items may simply lexically
> > specify what "number" they are, and failure to agree is simply a
> > feature-clash, i.e., there is no trigger or controller of agreement.
>
> That strikes me as wildly unlikely, unless you want to say that the
> head of "dogs" is "-s".
Ah, but you're assuming that morphemes have independent existence!
There are quite a number of morphologists that would disagree with
that claim (Anderson, e.g.). Anyways, there are also people who
believe in morphemes who would say something very much like -s is
the head of "dogs", since the features of -s override whatever
features "dog-" may have.
(An analogous question: is "the" the head of the NP "the dog"?
Many, perhaps most, syntacticians now seem to think so.)
> To my mind, claiming that American (at least)
> English doesn't have syntactic agreement in number is like claiming that
> it has grammatical gender on the grounds that ships, bells, countries
> (sometimes), and a few other inanimates are called "she".
But I wasn't saying that Am. English doesn't have syntactic agreement --
indeed, quite the opposite. My point (which was really more speculative
than assertive) relied on a different conception of the role of syntax
than is commonly supposed, one which is monostratal, i.e., all modules
generate structures simultaneously, and constraints serve to weed out
contradictions. So, if all nouns are lexically marked for number,
singular or plural, and are not actually assigned such by the syntax,
then agreement is reduced to insisting on "coherence" (to use an LFG
turn of phrase). As the tree-structure is built up from the lexical
entries, at each node a unification of features occurs, which percolates
up to a yet higher node. Grammaticality (or the lack thereof) depends
on whether clashes occur at any level.
So, getting back to the "United States is", a view of grammar such as
that which I outlined above would unify English dialects. The difference
of dialect between British English and American English would be localized
in the lexicon, which would have a different rule mapping the properties
of formal semantic or conceptual structures with morphological structure
that produces new lexical items. The kind of generalization that you
want produced by the syntax would be captured in this kind of interface,
but with different modules. (Syntax would still be involved, since it
would still have to govern whether features clash or not. It just wouldn't
actually determine those features.)
==========================================================================
Thomas Wier "I find it useful to meet my subjects personally,
Dept. of Linguistics because our secret police don't get it right
University of Chicago half the time." -- octogenarian Sheikh Zayed of
1010 E. 59th Street Abu Dhabi, to a French reporter.
Chicago, IL 60637
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 19:33:18 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
Trebor wrote:
> Over at the ZBB, during a discussion of (grammatical) gender, this was
> said:
> "There's gender in Fijian ... at least one of them is called "edible"
> gender
> ... and like the genders of German, they manifest themselves in the
> articles
> rather than the words themselves. Since Fijian is an isolated member of
> the
> Oceanic family, it's hard to compare it to anything. I don't know how the
> Fijian gender system arose."
>
> Anyone have any information on this?
I'm not sure we'd want to call that gender-- it's related to possession, so
wouldn't necessarily cover all nouns.
Fijian distinguishes 4 types of possession: (1) inalienable (body parts,
probably kin terms, probably some other things); (2) alienable
(things that one can possess or obtain for one's use)-- these two categories
are common in many languages of Oceania, Eastern Indonesia (Moluccan area)
and of course elsewhere in the world; assignment to one or the other
category is often flexible. The other two are more or less unique to Fijian
(3) edible, (4) drinkable-- clearly these last two are fairly restricted as
to what they can refer to.
Inalienable: the various possessive forms are suffixed
For the others, the poss. suffixes go on special bases, which then precede
the noun in question:
Alienable (or general): the suffixes are attached to no-
Edible: attached to ke-
Drinkable: attached to me-
There can be some overlap: noqu devu 'my sugarcane' (e.g. to sell), mequ
devu 'my sugarcane' (to "drink" i.e. suck on); and perhaps yate/qu 'my
liver' vs. kequ yate 'the piece of liver I can eat'-- it may be that these
categories so exited the early researchers because when first contacted, the
Fijians were still cannibals.
ke- and me- are derived historically from the words for 'eat' and 'drink';
no- is relatable to the Proto-Austronesian possessive marker *ni
I don't have a grammar of Fijian, but the dictionary notes that ke- (edible)
forms can be used with things characteristic of a person.
There is at least one other Austronesian language with an "edible"
category-- Selaru, spoken in the Tanimbar islands way in the east of
Indonesia; who knows, there may be others in that still-poorly-described
neck of the woods.
> Trebor
> ...who would like to welcome Carol to the list!
Ditto!! Perhaps our new Oceanist knows of other languages in the area that
have an "edible" etc. category.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:20:42 -0400
From: Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
Roger �rta: "Fijian distinguishes 4 types of possession: (1) inalienable
(body parts, probably kin terms, probably some other things); (2) alienable
(things that one can possess or obtain for one's use)-- these two categories
are common in many languages of Oceania, Eastern Indonesia (Moluccan area)
and of course elsewhere in the world; assignment to one or the other
category is often flexible. The other two are more or less unique to Fijian
(3) edible, (4) drinkable-- clearly these last two are fairly restricted as
to what they can refer to.
One question: Say you were talking about e.g. your artificial eye? Would
that be expressed alienably or inalienably, since you can (theoretically at
least) remove it? And what if e.g. your heart was donated?
"Inalienable: the various possessive forms are suffixed
"For the others, the poss. suffixes go on special bases, which then precede
the noun in question:
"Alienable (or general): the suffixes are attached to no-
Edible: attached to ke-
Drinkable: attached to me-
*That* is pretty neat! :) I think I'll steal that for a conlang...
"There can be some overlap: noqu devu 'my sugarcane' (e.g. to sell), mequ
devu 'my sugarcane' (to "drink" i.e. suck on); and perhaps yate/qu 'my
liver' vs. kequ yate 'the piece of liver I can eat'-- it may be that these
categories so exited the early researchers because when first contacted, the
Fijians were still cannibals.
A history question: How did the Europeans stop the Fijians from being
cannabals? I mean, wouldn't they be scared they might be next? :P
"I don't have a grammar of Fijian, but the dictionary notes that ke-
(edible) forms can be used with things characteristic of a person.
Any examples? I don't quite understand that.
"Ditto!! Perhaps our new Oceanist knows of other languages in the area that
have an "edible" etc. category.
Yes indeed! (That's why I asked *here*, not on the ZBB-- I thought since you
and Carol are experts on Oceanic langs you'd be the best people to ask).
Oh and another question: What are Formosan langs? ...Wait a minute, isn't
there an island/archipelago called Formosa-something? *shrugs* Anyway, what
are some distinguishing characteristics? Oh yes, one more... lol... Any info
on Tahitian? Google is unhelpful...
Thanks,
Trebor
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 17:32:06 -0700
From: "B. Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:20:42 -0400, Trebor Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> A history question: How did the Europeans stop the Fijians from being
> cannabals? I mean, wouldn't they be scared they might be next? :P
Probably punishment from missionaries, sort of how tattooing in
Polynesia was banned, except in the Marquesas and Samoa (i'm
forgetting other islands it survived)
--
Listen Johnny;
You're like a mother to the girl you've fallen for,
And you're still falling,
And if they come tonight
You'll roll up tight and take whatever's coming to you next.
Slow Graffitti - Belle and Sebastian
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 20:41:30 -0400
From: "Ph. D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
Trebor Jung wrote:
>
> A history question: How did the Europeans stop the Fijians from being
> cannabals? I mean, wouldn't they be scared they might be next? :P
Superior firepower :-)
> Oh and another question: What are Formosan langs? ...Wait a minute, isn't
> there an island/archipelago called Formosa-something? *shrugs* Anyway,
what
> are some distinguishing characteristics? Oh yes, one more... lol... Any
info
> on Tahitian? Google is unhelpful...
Formosa was once the name of the island of Taiwan.
(Portuguese for "beautiful," I believe.)
--Ph. D.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 22:50:54 -0400
From: Carol Anne Buckley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
Let me dust off my Fijian grammar over the weekend and see what I can find
out.
I don't offhand know of other languages w/ the edible/drinkable gender
thing, if you want to call it gender. I would bet that a donated heart,
prosthesis, etc. could be alienable or inalienable; but why doesn't someone
ask a native speaker of Fijian? My advice is to call BYU or the Polynesian
Cultural Center.
Fijians seemed to have nothing to do other than invent extra classes of
things. Singular, dual, *trial* and plural pronouns. I thought Samoan and
Hawaiian had a lot of pronouns till I looked at Fijian.
Hawaiian has alienable/inalienable possession. Your boat or car is
inalienable, your spouse is alienable. Makes sense, no? Hawaiian seems to
recognize that when we rely on tech, we are droid. I will have to find out
if people possess their PCs and laptops alienably or inalienably.
Actually if you were a boat builder, your boats (that you built) would be
alienable. I look at the owner of something alienably possessed as being
very similar to an agent. I don't see alienable/inalienable as gender, that
is to say, as a feature of nouns. I see it as being just one more way to
express the actor/acted upon relationship (or something kind of like it).
If you possess something alienable, you can do something about it.
But remember, I'm a creative, not an academic. I am not a practicing
linguist...I went into film/video production after I got my MA. Now I write
boring, well-paying corporate stuff and exciting, non-paying fiction. Also
I am teaching and choreographing a lot of traditional hula, so I get to look
at my Hawaiian language texts a whole lot.
Take everything I say w/ a grain of salt, because I'm on this list for
amusement. I spend all day checking facts for my clients... I'm more into
sheer speculation, here.
Nice to meet y'all,
C.
PS - So what did someone want to know about Tahitian?
----- Original Message -----
From: "Trebor Jung" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 24, 2004 8:20 PM
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
> Roger �rta: "Fijian distinguishes 4 types of possession: (1) inalienable
> (body parts, probably kin terms, probably some other things); (2)
alienable
> (things that one can possess or obtain for one's use)-- these two
categories
> are common in many languages of Oceania, Eastern Indonesia (Moluccan area)
> and of course elsewhere in the world; assignment to one or the other
> category is often flexible. The other two are more or less unique to
Fijian
> (3) edible, (4) drinkable-- clearly these last two are fairly restricted
as
> to what they can refer to.
>
> One question: Say you were talking about e.g. your artificial eye? Would
> that be expressed alienably or inalienably, since you can (theoretically
at
> least) remove it? And what if e.g. your heart was donated?
>
> "Inalienable: the various possessive forms are suffixed
>
> "For the others, the poss. suffixes go on special bases, which then
precede
> the noun in question:
>
> "Alienable (or general): the suffixes are attached to no-
> Edible: attached to ke-
> Drinkable: attached to me-
>
> *That* is pretty neat! :) I think I'll steal that for a conlang...
>
> "There can be some overlap: noqu devu 'my sugarcane' (e.g. to sell), mequ
> devu 'my sugarcane' (to "drink" i.e. suck on); and perhaps yate/qu 'my
> liver' vs. kequ yate 'the piece of liver I can eat'-- it may be that these
> categories so exited the early researchers because when first contacted,
the
> Fijians were still cannibals.
>
> A history question: How did the Europeans stop the Fijians from being
> cannabals? I mean, wouldn't they be scared they might be next? :P
>
> "I don't have a grammar of Fijian, but the dictionary notes that ke-
> (edible) forms can be used with things characteristic of a person.
>
> Any examples? I don't quite understand that.
>
> "Ditto!! Perhaps our new Oceanist knows of other languages in the area
that
> have an "edible" etc. category.
>
> Yes indeed! (That's why I asked *here*, not on the ZBB-- I thought since
you
> and Carol are experts on Oceanic langs you'd be the best people to ask).
>
> Oh and another question: What are Formosan langs? ...Wait a minute, isn't
> there an island/archipelago called Formosa-something? *shrugs* Anyway,
what
> are some distinguishing characteristics? Oh yes, one more... lol... Any
info
> on Tahitian? Google is unhelpful...
>
> Thanks,
> Trebor
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 22:50:46 -0400
From: Mike Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
Roger Mills wrote:
>Arthaey Angosii wrote:
>
>> > I *really* like your refrigerator magnet idea, Adrian.
>
>SO DO I!!
Has anyone else suggested bumper stickers yet?
M
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:18:40 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: apology
Sorry about that blank message; hit the wrong button.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 23:17:34 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: September 24, 2004 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: CHAT Fridge magnets (was: Conlang Flag: Results Are In!)
> Roger Mills wrote:
>
> >Arthaey Angosii wrote:
> >
> >> > I *really* like your refrigerator magnet idea, Adrian.
> >
> >SO DO I!!
>
> Has anyone else suggested bumper stickers yet?
>
> M
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 00:24:26 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fijian gender
Thanks to my dumb boo-boo, I'm over quota, so this will have to wait 40+
minutes...........
Trebor wrote:
> "I don't have a grammar of Fijian, but the dictionary notes that ke-
> (edible) forms can be used with things characteristic of a person.
>
> Any examples? I don't quite understand that.
Here's the entry for _ke_: "...indicating (1) that the object is to be
eaten _na kena uvi_ 'his yam, to eat', as against na nona uvi 'his yam, e.g.
to plant'. (2) concerning a person or thing _na kena i tukutuku 'the story
about him or it'; (3) expressing certain characteristics of a person or
thing [no example]."
> Oh and another question: What are Formosan langs? ...Wait a minute, isn't
> there an island/archipelago called Formosa-something? *shrugs*
Older name for Taiwan; probably not PC anymore.
Anyway, what
> are some distinguishing characteristics?
On the endangered list, for one thing. Some consider them "close" to the
Proto-Austronesian state because they are apparently very conservative
phonologically; grammatically they're mostly trigger-type. A lot of
vocabulary that isn't reflected in any of the other AN languages.
>Oh yes, one more... lol... Any info
> on Tahitian? Google is unhelpful...
I know; I tried to find something on Tahitian too.
Here are some references from a paper I have:
Coppenrath, Hubert & Paul Prevost 1975, Grammaire approfondie de la langue
tahitienne. Papeete.
(Language Training Mission) 1973, Te re'o Tahiti no te mau misionare.
Provo Utah [That's probably BYU]
The reason these aren't very up to date is that they come from a paper
published in 1979.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 21:56:36 -0700
From: bob thornton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Orthography help, please.
Tamas Racsko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"On 20 Sep 2004 bob thornton wrote:
> The way I work on a language is phonemes first, orthography second,
> tactics last of the sound/sound representation section of the language.
> So, no, I do not have the phonotactics yet. I just started on it this
> weekend.
If I were you :)) I would fix the basics of phonotactics before
development of orthography because spelling possibilities are
limited by the allowed sound clusters. If you would choose e.g.
|tr| for /t`/ you would have later problems with the notation of
sound cluster /tr\/ (if you will admit it in the phonotactics)."
Sorry for the delay in reply: Have been updating and revising both the phonology and
the phonotactics of the so far nameless lang. The revised phonology is...
CONSONANTS
Plosives (NOTE: Similar sounds are grouped together to save space. I am not indicating
allophones)
/t/ /t_h/ /t`/
/d/ /d_h/ /d`/
/k/ /k_h/ /k_?\/
/g/ /g_h/ /g_?\/
/p/ /p_h/ /p_?\/
/b/ /b_h/ /b_?\/
Nasals
/m/ /m_h/ /m_?\/
/n/ /n_h/ /n`/
/N/ /N_h/ /N_?\/
Fricatives
/s/ /s_h/ /s`/
/z/ /z_h/ /z`/
/S/ /S_?\/
/Z/ /Z_?\/
/K/ /K`/
/K\/ /K\`/
Liquids
/r\/ /r\_h/ /r\`/
/l/ /l`/
VOWELS
/i/ /I/ /e/ /E/ /&/ /6/ /@/ /u/ /o/ /V/ /O/
Four vowels can be long: /i/ /e/ /o/ /u/
PHONOTACTICS: (as much as I have)
Available word forms: CV, CVC, CVCV, CVCVC,
Retroflex liquids and vowels cannot start a word. Aspirated consonants and lateral
fricatives cannot be word final.
Stress falls on the ultimate syllable on verbs, and the penultimate on nouns. The
schwa only occurs in unstressed position.
Verbs can only be CVCV, CVCVC
I'm planning on developing roots from proto-indo-european... can this be done with the
available phonemes and phonotactics?
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 01:56:59 EDT
From: John Leland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Spanish-related question ((q)SVO ?):question words
In Rihana-ye, questions are indicated by adding the suffix -hi to verbs:
Feba mafa wigo-hi?
You fish ate-query?
Means "Did you eat the fish?"
John Leland
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 02:03:26 EDT
From: John Leland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Alternative LIfestyles: Deuteronomic Curse
In Jasas, the standard lifestyle is patriarchal polygamy (elite males with
large harems; non-elite males 1+ wives depending on what they can afford.) The
more controversial
aspects of sexuality have not arisen linguistically as yet. However, I did
translate the following which at least forbids bestality and incest, among other
things.
John Leland
Dazalamaz (Deut.27:15-26 KJV)
Cursed Be
15.
Dazalamaz babsa bajan tarko rafav tamko dasok,
Cursed be makes man graven or molten image,
dazok Zabij, basek gababuh basok,
abomination (to) Holy Father, craftsman's hands(by) work,
fahah vabga badok dawby sanys.
and puts it (in)secret place.
Fahah nablahanaz fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall answer and shall say all people "Amen."
16.
Dazalamaz dazna badaj badej baboj dafah badej babom
Cursed be makes-light he his father or his mother
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
17.
Dazalamaz kafva badaj badej faseb sawok.
Cursed be removes he his neighbor's landfmark.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
18.
Dazalamaz babsa badaj dabvaw dawob kavav bavys.
Cursed be makes he to wander blind from way.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
19.
Dazalamaz dabsa badaj kaseb, dajeb,
Cursed be perverts he stranger's, fatherless's,
fahah dajem zawow.
and widow'sjudgment.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
20.
Dazalamaz dabta badaj fasah badej babej bajym
Cursed be lusts he with his father's wife.
kahah dazwa badaj badej babej mafok.
because exposes he his father's skirt.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
21.
Dazalamaz dabta badaj fasah hahky fafyf.
Cursed be lusts he with any beast.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
22.
Dazalamaz dabta badaj fasah badej fabyt,
Cursed be lusts he with his sister,
babej babyt rafav babem babyt
his father's daughter or his mother's daughter
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
23.
Dazalamaz dabta badaj fasah badej jatym.
Cursed be lusts he with his mother-=in-law.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
24.
Dazalamaz babra badaj badej fasob dawwu.
Cursed be attacks he his neighbor secretly
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
25.
Dazalamaz babga badaj dapok bawraw zabso bajon.
Cursed be takes he bribe to slay innocent man.
Fahah bablahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
26.
Dazalamaz waslar badaj e zawel balanoh
Cursed be confirms-not he this holy law's words
babaw kadoh.
to do them.
Fahah babalahanaz hahha babah "Zalbaz."
And shall say all people "Amen."
Substantially revised and copied 9.24.04
A number of changes were made in copying this text.
Many were simply corrections to make it more
accurate (adding words accidently omitted, correcting
mistakes in writing established Jases words.)
A few of the more significant changes were:
1) changing "Zabyj" (locative/ablative)) to "Zabij" (dative)
in the expression "an abomination to Holy Father (God)"
2) adding"fasah" "with" where the original had assumed the sense
was contained in the ablative/locative form, chiefly in regard to sex.
This follows the general rule in Jases Lalal that this
form is only used for true locative when used without a preposition.
3) changing "dazla" to"waslar" to translate "not confirm"
because a) a negative verb should end in r
b) the form "dazla" was an unintended homonym with the word for
"curse" which appears repeatedly in this text.
I decided not to change the variant forms of "or"
as I have recently decided, in the interests of both realism
and speed of translation, that I will accept more
synonyms and not always check new coinages against my
dictionary to avoid inventing synonyms.
I may say in general I followed the KJV English closely.
The chief difference was that I translated KJV "lies with"
meaning "have sex" by the Jases word "dabta"
meaning "wrongly desires/has sex"--
translated "lusts" in the interlinear above--
instead of with a word literally meaning "lies down."
(which should be "nabva").
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
