------------------------ 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: TECH: rejected spam postings -- is it me?
From: william drewery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: (Mis)Naming a Language
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: (Mis)Naming a Language
From: Doug Dee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
From: william drewery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: (Mis)Naming a Language
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: Ashamed of [T]? (fy: /T/ -> /t_d/?)
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: /T/ -> /t_d/?
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: i-Mutation
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: samhain?
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: samhain?
From: Danny Wier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: Ashamed of [T]? (fy: /T/ -> /t_d/?)
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Advanced English + Babel text
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: samhain?
From: Danny Wier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: experimental crocodile phonology questions
From: Jeffrey Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: Ashamed of [T]? (fy: /T/ -> /t_d/?)
From: "B. Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
From: "B. Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: Advanced English + Babel text
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Advanced English + Babel text
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
From: Jan van Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:57:01 -0800
From: william drewery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TECH: rejected spam postings -- is it me?
same here, I just got one!! And I found 367 spyware programs on my PC. I got rid of
them, and configured my browser security to be more aggressive. In all honesty, anyone
who participates in any list should probably have spyware prtection programs
Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Danny Wier and others:
> About once per day I'm getting "Rejected posting" e-mails from our
> Listserv
> saying "You are not authorized to send mail to the CONLANG list from your
> account", followed by header information, and then various types of spam.
> Is
> it just me or is anyone/everyone else getting these?
>
FWIW, I'm _not_ receiving any such msgs.
I did receive them, and lots more too, back in March/April when my comp. was
beset with spyware and the virus that was going around then.
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:58:09 -0500
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: (Mis)Naming a Language
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:43:28 EDT, David Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>So, my question: Has something similar happened to anyone
>else?
I already made sure before via Ethnologue that there is no language of that
name. However, a Altavista search (Google stinks) brings interesting results:
- there seems to be a river, a mountain and a location in Mongolia named
"Choton", but I could find neither in my world atlas.
- It seems to be a Nepalese first name (perhaps also in other countries in
that area). There were many links about a Dr. Choton Basu, a college prof in
WI-Whitewater.
- Choton is a precint of NY!? Someone can confirm that? Found it here:
http://athletics.vassar.edu/crosscountry/w-roster.php
--
Pascal A. Kramm, author of Choton
official Choton homepage:
http://www.choton.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:12:54 +0200
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
Rodlox wraat:
> setting the theological parts aside, God couldn't destroy a house made
of
> stones or wood?
Sorry, Rodlox, the answer to your question lies in the field of theology,
not in semantics or broader linguistics. If you want a plain "yes or no"
answer, then Yes, He could. But their desire to use bricks illustrated their
proud.
> > For that purpose we need to know the essence of the story, what is
> relevant
> > and what is irrelevant. In this particular case bricks, being man-made,
> are
> > essential for the meaning, as opposed to stones, given by G-d as they
are.
>
> um, that might be true, but stones can be shaped just as well as bricks
can
> be (since mud was given by God, too).
Bingo! That is why stones for this purpose should NOT be shaped. I could
have given references, but again, it's theology, and here we try to follow
the principle "No cross no crown", that is "Avoid discussion religion and
politics".
> > Otherwise you can have smth like "In older days there were news, and the
> > news were together with Humpbacked Spirit..."
>
> Quasimodo!
Hehe! LOL! I could have given even more examples, but I should not...
-- Isaac
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:19:20 EST
From: Doug Dee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: (Mis)Naming a Language
In a message dated 10/31/2004 2:58:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>Choton is a precint of NY!? Someone can confirm that? Found it here:
>http://athletics.vassar.edu/crosscountry/w-roster.php
That appears to be a typo. There is a "Croton-Harmon High School" in New
York State, which appears to be in the town of Croton-on-Hudson, but no
"Choton-Harmon" that I can discover.
There's also a "Croton Falls" in New York State, but so far as I can tell no
Chotons.
Doug
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:32:27 -0800
From: william drewery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
I've found some of the questions brought up by this thread pretty interesting, because
my conlang/conculture are extraterrestrials with an inorganic, sulfuric acid based
chemistry. I wonder if i should translate "water" using their word for sulfuric acid,
or using their chemical name for "hydrogen monoxide".
Travis
Rodlox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: Carsten Becker
To:
Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 4:15 PM
Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
> On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:04:52 +0200, Rodlox wrote:
>
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: Carsten Becker
> >To:
> >Sent: Sunday, October 31, 2004 1:45 PM
> >Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
> >
> >
> >> On Saturday 30 October 2004 17:25, Jeffrey Henning wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:32:57 -0000, caeruleancentaur
> >
> >> As I wrote, I thought my people know what bricks are etc.,
> >> but bricks are not very much used.
> >
> > minor question - are bricks not much used because they're seen as
> >expensive/unclean/other ? the answer to that might - *might* - influence
> >how your conlang's speakers would view the Tower of Babel when you
translate
> >it.
> >
> > just a thought.
> > sorry.
> >
> > have nice days.
>
> Phew, I haven't thought about that yet.
oh.
oops.
sorry.
please accept my apologies.
>
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:33:03 -0500
From: John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: (Mis)Naming a Language
Pascal A. Kramm scripsit:
> - Choton is a precint of NY!? Someone can confirm that? Found it here:
> http://athletics.vassar.edu/crosscountry/w-roster.php
The association with "Harmon" (a neighboring town) makes it clear
that this is a typographical error for "Croton", a village on the
Hudson River about 33 miles / 53 km north of New York City.
--
John Cowan www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are books that are at once excellent and boring. Those that at
once leap to the mind are Thoreau's Walden, Emerson's Essays, George
Eliot's Adam Bede, and Landor's Dialogues. --Somerset Maugham
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:45:28 -0500
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ashamed of [T]? (fy: /T/ -> /t_d/?)
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 06:46:48 +0000, Jan van Steenbergen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- Mark J. Reed skrzypszy:
>
>> I only added that as an aside in my post, whose primary purpose
>> was to ask why some Germans are "ashamed" to say [T]. Feeling
>> ashamed about producing a phone just strikes me as odd. I still
>> don't understand it.
>
>In Dutch, [T] can only be heard in the speech of people with a speech
>defect. And I think that's the answer to your question. Even though
>the effect is not the same when Dutch people speak English, many of
>them are hesitant to use it even there. It's like the fear to get
>undressed before entering a sauna, even if you know that all the
>others are undressed, too. ;)
It's exactly the same in German - either th sound can only be heard from
people having a speech defect. As such, the sound is very undesirable, and
that's why I wrote a German would be rather *disgusted* by it (and certainly
not *ashamed*).
--
Pascal A. Kramm, author of Choton
official Choton homepage:
http://www.choton.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:33:05 -0500
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: /T/ -> /t_d/?
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:09:34 +0200, Carsten Becker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello!
>
>I have got two maybe a little stupid questions.
>
>My first question is whether ...
>
>(A) it would be likely that /T/ changes into /t_d/?
Not very likely imo. It would probably rather change into simple /s/
or even the affricative /t_s/.
>My naming language Ambrian has /T/ and /t/, but Ayeri has
>only got /t_d/. Nevertheless I think /t_d/ can develop
>easily to a fricative. So would it be ...
>
>(B) sensible at all to have a sound change if the language
> at least in some dialects accepts /T/ (the ones near to
> the area where Ambrian is/was spoken? I guess /T/ would
> change to /s/ in conservative dialects, just like many
> Germans do because they're ashamed to pronounce /T/.
*Ashamed* is totally wrong (at least for me). *Disgusted* is much more
like it.
--
Pascal A. Kramm, author of Choton
official Choton homepage:
http://www.choton.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:05:17 -0500
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: i-Mutation
On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 09:55:09 -0400, Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Does anybody have an Idea into what sound an i could mutate (a->�,o->�,u-
>>�,e([e]very->�(German [E]nde))? I am constructing a language that uses
>these mutations for grammatical infelction.
It could easily become rounded and then be pronounced � /y/.
This has already happened in German with foreign words from English, e.g.
"mystery". German doesn't have an y by itself, it exclusively occurs in
words imported from foreign languages, and somehow, the y in foreign words
(if it's not at the end of the word) which is normally /i/ became rounded
and thus /y/
so mystery would be /mysteri/ rather than /misteri/.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:22:22 -0000
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: samhain?
--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
joshua tanaka wrote:
> why is 'samhain' pronounced 'saUen' ?
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
----
I knew about this pronunciation. Would someone help me (us) with the
pronunciation of the other three: Beltane, Imbolc and Lughnassadh?
Charlie
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 16:08:50 -0600
From: Danny Wier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: samhain?
From: "caeruleancentaur"
> I knew about this pronunciation. Would someone help me (us) with the
> pronunciation of the other three: Beltane, Imbolc and Lughnassadh?
The Irish pronunciation of Beltane, written Bealtaine, is [b_j&[EMAIL PROTECTED]@]. I
think. I don't know how Imbolc is pronounced (or spelled in current Irish
orthography), but Lughnasadh is [lu:[EMAIL PROTECTED]@] because it's spelled L�nasa
nowadays.
I'm never sure about Gaeilge pronunciation though. Is anyone?
(See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Calendar for more info.)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:15:07 +0000
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ashamed of [T]? (fy: /T/ -> /t_d/?)
Pascal A. Kramm wrote:
>On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 06:46:48 +0000, Jan van Steenbergen
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>>--- Mark J. Reed skrzypszy:
>>
>>
>>
>>>I only added that as an aside in my post, whose primary purpose
>>>was to ask why some Germans are "ashamed" to say [T]. Feeling
>>>ashamed about producing a phone just strikes me as odd. I still
>>>don't understand it.
>>>
>>>
>>In Dutch, [T] can only be heard in the speech of people with a speech
>>defect. And I think that's the answer to your question. Even though
>>the effect is not the same when Dutch people speak English, many of
>>them are hesitant to use it even there. It's like the fear to get
>>undressed before entering a sauna, even if you know that all the
>>others are undressed, too. ;)
>>
>>
>
>It's exactly the same in German - either th sound can only be heard from
>people having a speech defect. As such, the sound is very undesirable, and
>that's why I wrote a German would be rather *disgusted* by it (and certainly
>not *ashamed*).
>
>
'Disgusted' has extremely strong connotations. I wouldn't use it unless
it literally made you feel nauseous.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:21:03 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
William Drewery wrote:
> I've found some of the questions brought up by this thread pretty
> interesting, because my conlang/conculture are extraterrestrials with an
> inorganic, sulfuric acid based chemistry. I wonder if i should translate
> "water" using their word for sulfuric acid, or using their chemical name
> for "hydrogen monoxide".
>
Hmm, maybe you should find some alternative text...:-))) I've avoided
translating most biblical texts into Kash for the simple reason that they
don't have the concept of a Supreme Being who guides ~takes interest in ~or
otherwise interferes or gets involved in human affairs. The Creator whom
they do acknowledge is not worshipped; they believe that having created the
universe and everything in it, the Creator withdrew, and it's up to the
universe et al. to make the best of what there is. I did once translate a
bit of Genesis 1, but that of course is a suitable creation myth(1). The
other day I was pondering how to do the Babel story and decided it would be
Nende, the Sky Spirit, who got angry at the people for trying to invade his
domain... but that changes the story. He probably had to be majorly placated
when flight was invented.
------------------------
(1) Also, the language got a little boring, since most verbs and many nouns
required the honorific prefix par- ~pra-. For example, the first line: ri
parangasi, e parahambesa yaparahan nele� i hinda.
------------------------
That thought led to the idea that Kinda, the Earth Spirit, required a _very_
costly sacrifice from country folk who dug a privy or cess-pit--a gold or
silver coin at the least. In modern times, sewer construction, and of course
mines, are the occasion for very elaborate ceremonies. Most city dwellers
really don't take this stuff very seriously anymore-- but you never
know.....
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 00:15:29 +0100
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Advanced English + Babel text
Here it is, my own take at an English spelling reform!
Unlike many others, it doesn't make up some awkward far-fetched spellings,
but rather stays close to the actual official Ipa pronunciations.
http://www.choton.org/ae/
Right now you can find there:
- precise spelling and pronunciation rules
- Babel text
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Preamble)
- Hamlet, Act III Scene I ("To be or not to be")
- The Gettysburg Address
So that you get the general idea, I will post the Babel text below:
1 Nau se houl w�rld h�d wan l�ngwidg wis se s�im w�rds.
2 Dj�rniing ihstwards, men faund � pl�in in Shinar �nd seteld ser.
3 S�i s�id tu wan �naser: "Kam! Let's m�ik brik �nd b�rn it sarouli!"
S�i used brik insted of stoun �nd tar insted of mortar.
4 Sen s�i s�id: "Kam! Let's bild � siti for us wis � tauer up tu se skei,
tu m�ik � n�im for us, so s�t wi ar nat sk�terd ouwer se houl �rs!"
5 Bat HaShem k�im daun tu sih se siti �nd se tauer men wer bilding.
6 HaShem s�id: "If �s wan pihpel wis wan l�ngwidg s�i h�f bigan duing sis,
nasing s�i pl�n tu du wil bi impasibel for sem.
7 Kam! Let's gou daun �nd konfjuhs ser l�ngwidg, so s�t s�i wil nat
underst�nd ihtsh oser."
8 So HaShem sk�terd sem ouwer se houl �rs, �nd s�i stopd bilding se siti.
9 Serfor se siti was n�imd Babel, bikohs ser HaShem konfjuhsd se l�ngwidg
of se houl w�rld; fram ser HaShem sk�terd sem ouwer se houl �rs.
--
Pascal A. Kramm, author of Choton
official Choton homepage:
http://www.choton.org
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:48:08 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
Jan van Steenbergen wrote:
> During the last few weeks, I have been working on Wenedyk quite
> intensively. ....
> Two things about this vowel are bothering me.
>
> First of all, diphthongisation. According to my books, Latin long E
> and OE were pronounced [e] in Vulgar Latin, while Latin short E and
> AE were pronounced [E]. Until now, I have been assuming that long E
> and long I diphthongised to [iE], thus giving SE: > *sje > sze. But
> I'm slowly finding out that in all Romance languages except
> Portuguese diphthongisation occurred rather in the short version,
> [E].
Unless I'm mistaken, long e diphthongized in certain envs. in French-- the
pronouns me/te/se, words like lege-, rege-, credere, debere etc.
(C-loss may have something to do with those; I don't recall the rules
offhand.)
Anyhow, I don't see any particular reason why long or tense vowels couldn't
undergo breaking (or diphthongization); they did in German, Dutch and
English after all.
>Now here's my question: when did this diphthongisation of [E]
> take place in Romance?
It must have been common, since it affects Romanian as well as the western
languages
And, how likely would it be that it did not
> happen in the Vulgar Latin that would later develop into Wenedyk (and
> Slvanjec, for that matter), but that instead [e] were diphthongised?
Substratum perhaps? The universal panacea for perplexed linguists :-)))
(snip the _yat_ discussion; out of my bailiwick)
> If my suspicions are true, I've been working with an [E] > [e] / [e]
> > [&] schedule, which I really don't think can hold any longer.
>
It seems a little contradictory (to me) that low vowels would raise, while
high vowels would lower.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:53:08 -0600
From: Danny Wier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: samhain?
From: "Danny Wier"
> From: "caeruleancentaur"
>
>> I knew about this pronunciation. Would someone help me (us) with the
>> pronunciation of the other three: Beltane, Imbolc and Lughnassadh?
>
> The Irish pronunciation of Beltane, written Bealtaine, is [b_j&[EMAIL PROTECTED]@]. I
> think. I don't know how Imbolc is pronounced (or spelled in current Irish
> orthography), but Lughnasadh is [lu:[EMAIL PROTECTED]@] because it's spelled L�nasa
> nowadays.
I forgot to mention that caol (broad) consonants tend to be velarized (but
not as much as Arabic emphatics), so Bealtaine is more like [b_j&[EMAIL PROTECTED]@].
According to what I've read.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:27:09 -0500
From: Jeffrey Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: experimental crocodile phonology questions
Partly OT ....
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:56:03 -0300, Pablo Flores
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>On Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:57:03 -0000, caeruleancentaur
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I am presuming from the context that, by "sentient," you
>> mean "speaking" as opposed to ordinary crocodiles that cannot speak.
>>
>> In reality, the word "sentient" does not mean that. It means
>> either "conscious" or "experiencing feeling or sensation." Thus,
>> ordinary crocodiles are, indeed, sentient.
>
>I've seen the word "sentient" used as a synonym of "self-conscius",
>i. e. "aware of _ego_" a lot. That's common use in science fiction,
>along with the much less common "sapient".
>
>> P.S. When the Buddhists speak of the Buddha saving all sentient
>> beings, they are not referring just to humans, but to all animate
>> life.
And, for some Buddhists, plants and minerals etc. are included indirectly,
since life and environment are said to be basically unified.
>I was thinking, "how can a non-self-conscious animal be saved?",
>when I realized that reaching salvation (Nirvana) implies abolishing
>self-consciousness. Could you elaborate?
I don't see a reply. I'm not clear about that variety of Buddhism. Do you
mean becoming unaware of self or becoming aware of non-self?
>ObConlang:
>I'm also remembering the character in (Delany's?) _Babel-17_ who
>had no awareness of self (or the 1st/2nd/3rd person split for that
>matter). Has somebody tried a conculture/conlang without that
>distinction?
Not yet! All of my *current* projects are supposed to have personal
affixes/pronouns at some point. But a *new* project perhaps ....
I think the Butcher *did* make a distinction, using some kind of sign
language (although perhaps not consciously) and eventually learned how to
use personal pronouns (that passage in chapter IV of part 3 is amusing),
despite Babel-17 not making the distinction.
>
>--Pablo
Jeff
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:45:11 -0700
From: Muke Tever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:48:08 -0500, Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> First of all, diphthongisation. According to my books, Latin long E
>> and OE were pronounced [e] in Vulgar Latin, while Latin short E and
>> AE were pronounced [E]. Until now, I have been assuming that long E
>> and long I diphthongised to [iE], thus giving SE: > *sje > sze. But
>> I'm slowly finding out that in all Romance languages except
>> Portuguese diphthongisation occurred rather in the short version,
>> [E].
>
> Unless I'm mistaken, long e diphthongized in certain envs. in French-- the
> pronouns me/te/se, words like lege-, rege-, credere, debere etc.
> (C-loss may have something to do with those; I don't recall the rules
> offhand.)
Stressed long e and o became |ei|, |ou| then |oi|, |eu| in Old French
(examples: TE:LAM > toile; FLO:REM > fleur)
They diphthongize in Ibran, too: O: > /uo/ > /u:/ and E: > /je/ (E > /jE/)
*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: 19
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 21:50:07 -0800
From: "B. Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ashamed of [T]? (fy: /T/ -> /t_d/?)
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:54:45 -0500, Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure I'd call it "shame"; perhaps discomfort? I'll admit to feeling
> a little silly pronouncing Spanish the Castillian way. Cerveza and zapato
> make me feel as though I'm lisping, and having grown up with Mexican
> Spanish, it's extra work for me to remember what is an "s" and what isn't.
Indeed. It's uncomfortable to pronounce c before i and e and z as /T/
because I was taught to speak Spanish the Mexican way, with /s/. I
don't think it's too much more work for me, it's just not always
something I'd remember to do unless I heard native speakers around me
doing it.
Incedentally one of the jerkwad students I was paired with in Mexico
considered /T/ in Spanish a "hoity toity" pronunciation. In fact, the
idiot made fun of my professor's wife (who is Spanish) for pronouncing
her Spanish that way.
For me, it's a lot more uncomfortable to pronounce d as /D/ since i'm
only conditioned to use it in certain words.
> When I was in Geneva, I used to speak to one of the local shop owners who
> didn't know much English. She was trying to thank me in English, and it was
> Tenk you. She wanted instruction, so I told her to put her tongue between
> the tips of her upper and lower front teeth and hiss. She burst into
> uncontrollable laughter. I couldn't get her to make the sound, she was so
> distracted by the silliness of it. So I guess I can relate to Dutch and
> German discomfort!
I tried teaching the above jerkwad student how to pronounce /T/. He
could get /D/ right of course, but /T/ made him appear to be gagging
or vomiting his consonant. He'd made a very comical squinched facial
expression, and force his tongue between his teeth. I had to tell him
"Pronuncia /T/ como el d entre los vocales, y pasa aire entre la
lengua y los dientes" (Pronounce /T/ like the d between vowels and
pass air through the tongue and the teeth). This worked for the other
students, but he still couldn't get it right. I laughed ALL day over
it (with anyone else i'd be sympathetic, but i hated being around him
and being paired with him because he was a jerk)
--
You can turn away from me
but there's nothing that'll keep me here you know
And you'll never be the city guy
Any more than I'll be hosting The Scooby Show
Scooby Show - Belle and Sebastian
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:30:48 -0800
From: "B. Garcia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:21:03 -0500, Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've avoided
> translating most biblical texts into Kash for the simple reason that they
> don't have the concept of a Supreme Being who guides ~takes interest in ~or
> otherwise interferes or gets involved in human affairs. The Creator whom
> they do acknowledge is not worshipped; they believe that having created the
> universe and everything in it, the Creator withdrew, and it's up to the
> universe et al. to make the best of what there is.
Sounds a bit like the Filipino version of the creator -- it exists but
is distant and withdrawn and for help people go to the other gods or
their ancestors for help. This supreme god was considered far too
removed to go to for help unless circumstances were dire. However,
this idea of a supreme god, with a lower but still ever present god
helped make a transition into Christianity easy for Filipinos,
supposedly (and possibly for Muslim converts in the south as well).
I've read that the Spanish were surprised that the native culture had
words to express all the important Christian terminology and they had
little need for explanation.
As to the problem of translating the clay brick issue, i think the
text explains pretty much what they are. Do the Ayeri not have
pottery? If so, they'd understand that burning bricks makes them hard.
You'd have to maybe add in that they'd be used as stone blocks are
used.
--
You can turn away from me
but there's nothing that'll keep me here you know
And you'll never be the city guy
Any more than I'll be hosting The Scooby Show
Scooby Show - Belle and Sebastian
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 06:40:24 +0000
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
On Sunday, October 31, 2004, at 08:15 , Jan van Steenbergen wrote:
[snip]
> First of all, diphthongisation. According to my books, Latin long E
> and OE were pronounced [e] in Vulgar Latin, while Latin short E and
> AE were pronounced [E].
Correct.
> Until now, I have been assuming that long E
> and long I diphthongised to [iE], thus giving SE: > *sje > sze.
Wrong.
Long-i did not diphthongize in any variety of Romance.
Long-e (and short-i which in western Romance fell together with the old
long-e) diphthongized when stressed in north Gaul, thus _se_ became
*sej --> *sEj --> sOj (spelled _soi_ in Old French).
> But
> I'm slowly finding out that in all Romance languages except
> Portuguese diphthongisation occurred rather in the short version,
Portuguese did not retain the simple Latin vowels; it _monophthongized_
diphthongs that had developed in western Romance and medieval Iberian
Romance.
In all the romance langs, /O/ and /E/, which was the VL development of
Classical short-o and short-e (VL did not have phonemic long & short
vowels) became _rising diphthongs_ when in unblocked stressed syllables.
In some areas, e.g. the Iberian peninsular, they also became rising
diphthongs in blocked syllables; but this did not happen in Gaul or Italy.
In unstressed syllables there was no diphthongization.
> [E]. Now here's my question: when did this diphthongisation of [E]
> take place in Romance?
In the stressed unblocked syllables in VL.
> And, how likely would it be that it did not
> happen in the Vulgar Latin that would later develop into Wenedyk (and
> Slvanjec, for that matter), but that instead [e] were diphthongised?
Not likely IMO. There would have be strong influences from native langs of
the area and also reasons why it was not subject to contact with the wider
VL world of merchants & legionaries.
>
> The second problem is the mapping to the Common Slavic yat' (e^]. For
> some reason, I have always mapped Latin long E and OE to the yat',
> and short E and AE to the Slavic E. Intuititively, that works well in
> general, but I'm having some doubts about plausibility.
So am I - I would have thought it would have been the other way round -
but I'm no Slavic expert.
The Romance lang that actually did come under Slavic influence is Romanian.
Maybe you need to track down more specific info on the development of
Romanian.
Ray
===============================================
http://home.freeuk.com/ray.brown
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===============================================
Anything is possible in the fabulous Celtic twilight,
which is not so much a twilight of the gods
as of the reason." [JRRT, "English and Welsh" ]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 01:00:26 -0600
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advanced English + Babel text
From: "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Here it is, my own take at an English spelling reform!
> Unlike many others, it doesn't make up some awkward far-fetched spellings,
> but rather stays close to the actual official Ipa pronunciations.
>
> So that you get the general idea, I will post the Babel text below:
>
> 1 Nau se houl w�rld h�d wan l�ngwidg wis se s�im w�rds.
> 2 Dj�rniing ihstwards, men faund � pl�in in Shinar �nd seteld ser.
(Referring to this page:
<http://www.choton.org/ae/spell-pron.html>)
I enter into this thread with much fear and trembling, lest it become
just the kind of flame war that spawned the AUXLANG list. So, I will
keep my comments brief:
(1) It's not clear how this is closer to the IPA (note capitalization)
than any number of proposed spelling reforms of English. E.g. <dg>
or <dj> as potential forms for /dZ/, but <jh> for /Z/. Also, there
is not IPA symbol for /ks/, which you continue to represent as <x>.
(2) You seem to think a number of sounds exist in English which in
fact do not, at least in any of the remotely standard forms of the
language (e.g., [OY], onsetting [kv] except in rare loans, [�], etc.)
(3) You seem to think that some sounds that *do* exist are not worthy
of even the separate orthographic representation they already have.
For example, you conflate four phonemes /s/, /z/, /T/ and /D/ into
one grapheme <s>, which, to be frank, looks like a caricature of
foreign-speak in English. Most dialects of English have at least
three if not four distinct back mid or low vowels: /a/, /A/, /O/,
and /ow/. Also, all dialects have a contrast between /w/ and /v/,
yet you conflate these as <w>, and some dialects have a phonemic
/w_0/ in addition which you do not represent at all, or indeed
seem to be aware of.
(4) Why are you imposing all sorts of oddities of the German orthography
onto English -- <ei> for /aj/, <�> for /&/ and /e:/, and, with respect,
most bizarrely <eu> for /oj/?
(5) Some of your transcriptions suggest that you ought to ask a native
speaker of English for help: <question> is pronounced [kwEStSn=], not
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I believe most speakers of English also have [&w], not [aw],
yet you transcribe it with <au>. "conceived" in your Gettysburg Address
is /kOnsivd/, not /kOnsift/, and "lives" is [lajvz], not [lajfs]. Some
of the words you use in metadescription are either not words of English,
such as "metapher" (correctly "metaphor" /mEt@'fOr/) or do not exist in
the sense you use for them, such as "superfluent" which should be
"superfluous".(I could go on and on with such errors of pronunciation
and usage, but I said I wouldn't, so I won't.)
I'm not sure I'm understanding the intention of this "reform". If
you want to construct a conworld in which this reform takes place,
that's fine with me. But as is, it represents more an imposition of,
well, the entire German language on English, which naturally fails
to oblige you.
==========================================================================
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: 23
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 02:37:45 -0500
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Advanced English + Babel text
On Mon, 1 Nov 2004 00:15:29 +0100, Pascal A. Kramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Here it is, my own take at an English spelling reform!
>Unlike many others, it doesn't make up some awkward far-fetched spellings,
>but rather stays close to the actual official Ipa pronunciations.
>
>http://www.choton.org/ae/
No awkward spellings? For *German* eyes, that is. Looks to me like phonemic
English spelled more or less according to German selling conventions, esp.
spellings like the very counter-intuitive |ei, eu| for /ai, oi/ or |ah, ih,
oh, uh| for /A, i, O, u/ or |s| for /s/ and for /z/.
Even the usual pronunciation mistakes made by Germans are included, that is,
/T, D/ are spelled the same way as /s, z/ (all with |s|) and /w/ is spelled
the same way as /v/.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
j. 'mach' wust
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:40:41 +0200
From: "Isaac A. Penzev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: HELP: Translating the Babel Text
B. Garcia wrote:
> Sounds a bit like the Filipino version of the creator -- it exists but
> is distant and withdrawn and for help people go to the other gods or
> their ancestors for help. This supreme god was considered far too
> removed to go to for help unless circumstances were dire.
This is a wide-spread concept of "deus otiosus" (idle god), found in many
African and Asian cultures. Therefore, to learn from the Abrahamic religions
that the supreme deity is active and caring (or at least interested), makes
a real cultural shock for such cultures.
-- Yitzik
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:36:09 +0000
From: Jan van Steenbergen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Question about Latin E and Slavic yat'
--- Ray Brown skrzypszy:
> > Until now, I have been assuming that long E and long I
> > diphthongised to [iE], thus giving SE: > *sje > sze.
>
> Wrong.
>
> Long-i did not diphthongize in any variety of Romance.
I've been looking at Romanian, and what I found is that T, D, S
becames /ts/, /z/ and /S/ before short E and long I. If the process
is the same as in Slavic (where the same thing happens), then
something like /ti/ > /tii/ > /tji/ > /tsi/ must have been at work.
I would be lying if I said that I copied this development from
Romanian, but at least I was happy to find it confirmed there.
> Long-e (and short-i which in western Romance fell together with the
> old long-e) diphthongized when stressed in north Gaul, thus _se_
> became *sej --> *sEj --> sOj (spelled _soi_ in Old French).
While that is indeed true in all living Romance languages, in the
case of Wenedyk (and Slvanjec; my efforts have to a certain degree
been coordinated with Benct's) I have mapped short I and U to the
Slavic yers instead, which in my opinion is a reasonable (and for a
project like ours inevitable) thing to do. An admittedly weak
justification is the fact that the Slavo-Romance languages are
neither East nor West Romance, but constitute a separate subgroup in
IB.
> In all the romance langs, /O/ and /E/, which was the VL development
> of Classical short-o and short-e (VL did not have phonemic long &
> short vowels) became _rising diphthongs_ when in unblocked stressed
> syllables.
Except in Portugese, as far as I have understood.
> In unstressed syllables there was no diphthongization.
True, I forgot to mention that. That is also true in Wenedyk, by the
way.
> > [E]. Now here's my question: when did this diphthongisation of
> > [E] take place in Romance?
>
> In the stressed unblocked syllables in VL.
Thanks. But my question was worded badly. By "when" I actually meant:
in which century, more or less?
> > And, how likely would it be that it did not happen in the Vulgar
> > Latin that would later develop into Wenedyk (and Slvanjec, for
> > that matter), but that instead [e] were diphthongised?
>
> Not likely IMO. There would have be strong influences from native
> langs of the area and also reasons why it was not subject to
> contact with the wider VL world of merchants & legionaries.
Ah, but those have already been taken care of! :)
> > The second problem is the mapping to the Common Slavic yat' (e^].
> > For some reason, I have always mapped Latin long E and OE to the
> > yat', and short E and AE to the Slavic E. Intuititively, that
> > works well in general, but I'm having some doubts about
> > plausibility.
>
> So am I - I would have thought it would have been the other way
> round - but I'm no Slavic expert.
Neither am I. As it turned out, nobody knows precisely what the
Ancient Slavic yat' sounded like. In West Slavic is was probably
something like [&:], possibly also [j&:]. But then, Common Slavic is
also a flexible thing, encompassing quite a lot of centuries. The
fact that in Czech it becomes [i], while in Polish it becomes [E]
([a] before a hard dental consonant) isn't particularly helpful
either.
> The Romance lang that actually did come under Slavic influence is
> Romanian. Maybe you need to track down more specific info on the
> development of Romanian.
I must admit that I have neglected Romanian far too much in the
beginning, focussing on Classical Latin and (Western) Romance
instead. I've worked quite a lot with Peter Boyd-Bowman's "From Latin
to Romance in Sound Charts", which is a really nice work, but
unfortunately deals only with the "big four" (French, Spanish,
Portuguese, Italian).
Changing 3000 words and a reasonably-sized corpus is not an easy
task. I would undoubtedly have done a few things differently if I had
known everything I know now from the beginning. At this stage,
however, I'll rather limit myself to changing those things which are
impossible or utterly implausible.
Thank you for replying.
Jan
=====
"If you think you are too small to make a difference, try sleeping in a closed room
with a mosquito."
Relay 10: http://steen.free.fr/relay10/
___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger -
all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
