------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater?
Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/TzSHvD/SOnJAA/79vVAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 13 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Conlanging in the news
From: "Ph. D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: Sayings of the Wise #1,2 (Kash)
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Another tongue-in-cheek spelling reform
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: Another tongue-in-cheek spelling reform
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. All you (n)ever wanted to know about the Ferochromon
From: "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Another tongue-in-cheek spelling reform
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: Number systems (was: Picto & Dil)
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: (in)perfective imperatives (was: past tense imperative)
From: Vladimir Vysotsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: All you (n)ever wanted to know about the Ferochromon
From: Wesley Parish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: Announcement
From: Geoff Horswood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: All you (n)ever wanted to know about the Ferochromon
From: "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: Examples wanted: How do you say this?
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: Examples wanted: How do you say this?
From: Gregory Gadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:22:12 -0400
From: "Ph. D." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Conlanging in the news
Roger Mills wrote:
>
> The idea of the "Conlangers' Guild" sounds promising. Perhaps
> somehow we could get on google's list with something like "Need
> an invented language for your project? Contact the C. G...." with
> all sort of keywords in the head (invented/artificial/fictional/RPG
> etc. languages). That way we could avoid having to lunch every
> day at the Paramount commissary, or be located at a nearby
> university. Now that conlanging seems to be becoming so popular
> (necessary?), we really MUST exert some control over the process.
Hmmm. Can government licensing be far behind?
--Ph. D.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:33:14 -0400
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Sayings of the Wise #1,2 (Kash)
Oops, can't-get-own-conlang-right dept.....
> > Never test the water with both feet.
> yanda lunda ñoni sawuni umit aceçti loroni
> do.not ever test water.the use foot.pl.your both.of-them
>
Drat. ace is 'leg'; 'foot' is ekaran (obviously derived from haran 'walk'),
so it would be ...ekaranaçti loroni. Bad influence from L3, Indonesian,
where _kaki_ is both foot and leg.....
But ekaran(aç) seems a lot more syllables than necessary; and suggests there
should be a simpler word (basic, not derived) for 'foot'...also, it might
ought to be animate (plural -(i)la), though I've never decided if _all_ body
parts are.... Back to the drawing board.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:48:23 -0700
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Another tongue-in-cheek spelling reform
Rather than go in the direction of increased calrity
and phonetic precision, why not move in the direction
of increased ambiguity and phonetic confusion?
The vowels "e", "i" and "u" are dispensed with
entirely, and "y" takes their place in many contexts,
while they simply disappear in other contexts. "o" is
usually used to indicate somewhat round sounds (toe,
dew, book, hoop, etc.) and "a" (usually) for somewhat
broad sounds (fat, pond, fall, etc.), although it also
stands for sounds like "oi", "aw", and "ou" in some
contexts, as explained below. For the most part, long
words only retain one vowel at most. Initial vowels
are usually kept, subject to the simplification rules,
but as a general rule most vowels would be left out
except where absolutely necessary.
A set of about 1,000 ambiguous, overlapping and often
contradictory rules (with 1,001 exceptions) would tell
us, more or less, which vowel was omitted. For
example, "ss" would imply that the the preceeding
vowel was meant to be "a" (or maybe a short "i"). Due
to this rule "glass" unambiguously becomes "glss", and
cannot be mistaken for "glass" ("gloss"). ("a" is "aw"
when followed by a double consonant, as explained
below.) Long, initial, or stressed "i" and "e"
(including "ea", "ee" "ie", etc.) are usually just
written "y" with the context identifying what sound
they represent. The exception is the "-ite" sound
which is invariably written "ght" (with extensions
such as "pint" -> "pghnt") as in "Y bght of py ynd y
pghnt of yl byfor nghtfall." ("A bite of pie and a
pint of ale before nightfall.")
"a" represents just about any occurance of "oi", "ow",
"au" or "ou" with "oil" being spelled "al" and "out
house cow" spelled "at has ca." The exception is when
it is followed by a double consonant, in which case it
represents "aw" ("fall") or the "ah" in "pond"
(spelled "pannt"). (Note that rather than doubling
"th" in "father" the required "thth" is spelled "dd"
as in "faddr". "Has" (English "house") should not be
confused with "hzz" (English "has"), and "at" (English
"out") should not be confused with "att" (English
"at"). For example: "has" ("house"), "hzz" ("has"),
"hyz" ("haze"), "hyzz" ("highs"), "hz" ("his").
"gh" represents "f", except in the initial position
where it is written "ph", or when it is followed by
"t". Since "lght" could be both "light" and "lift"
according to that rule, when "f" is followed by "t" it
must be written "kh" so that "lift" -> "lkhtt". (Note
that the "kh" is not doubled to indicate a short vowel
preceeds it, instead the following consonant, "t" is
doubled.)
Most short words (two, three and four letters) have
arbitrary spelling that must simply be memorized,
although they generally follow more of the rules than
they break, except when they break more rules than
they follow.
When two words are spelled the same it is often the
case that one of them falls into disuse, being
replaced by a new word or an existing synonym. For
example, in final position the voiced/non-voiced
distinction is seldom made out so that "pig" becomes
"pgg", but "pick" also becomes "pgg", resulting in the
eventual loss of the farm animal meaning of "pgg",
which is replaced by "hagg" as in "Pgg wn yv td haggz
t bochr fr td fyzd tmarro." ("Pick one of the hogs to
butcher for the feast tomorrow.")
Voiced "th" followed by a broad vowel is written "d".
When that vowel is an "a" in conventional spelling the
following consonant is doubled so "that" becomes
"dtt". Contractions are made by attaching the
contracted word to the following word, without
apostrophe, rather than the preceeding word so that
"that's enough" becomes "dtt syngh".
"ng" is always pronounced "ing" when not preceeded by
a vowel or followed by a consonant. "sing" -> "sng",
but "song" would be "*sangng", ("a" followed by
doubled consonant = "aw") except that the "ng" is not
doubled. Instead, it is followed by "h" to indicated
the equivalent of doubling so that "song" -> "sangh".
(Note that "sanford" is "snghrt", so care must be
taken to notice whether an "ngh" combination is parsed
""ng+h" or "n+gh".) To differentiate between "sang"
and "snag" the "n" is doubled to show that it stands
apart from the "g" as in "snag" -> "snng". "sang" and
"sung" are spelled "syng" and "syngh" for no
particular reason, and must be learned by rote.
(rule book continues for 147 more pages giving
arbitrary rules and their many, many conflicting
exceptions.)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:35:58 -0400
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another tongue-in-cheek spelling reform
Gary Shannon wrote:
>Rather than go in the direction of increased calrity
>and phonetic precision, why not move in the direction
>of increased ambiguity and phonetic confusion?
>
Great! I find it really more interesting than the reforms everybody talked
about last days!
>The vowels "e", "i" and "u" are dispensed with
>entirely, and "y" takes their place in many contexts,
>while they simply disappear in other contexts. "o" is
>usually used to indicate somewhat round sounds (toe,
>dew, book, hoop, etc.) and "a" (usually) for somewhat
>broad sounds (fat, pond, fall, etc.), although it also
>stands for sounds like "oi", "aw", and "ou" in some
>contexts, as explained below. For the most part, long
>words only retain one vowel at most. Initial vowels
>are usually kept, subject to the simplification rules,
>but as a general rule most vowels would be left out
>except where absolutely necessary.
>
When a vowel is kept, should I infer it is the stressed one? the one that's
important enough for deserving being kept?
Or maybe not, it would too much regular :-P
>A set of about 1,000 ambiguous, overlapping and often
>contradictory rules (with 1,001 exceptions) would tell
>us, more or less, which vowel was omitted. For
>example, "ss" would imply that the the preceeding
>vowel was meant to be "a" (or maybe a short "i"). Due
>to this rule "glass" unambiguously becomes "glss", and
>cannot be mistaken for "glass" ("gloss"). ("a" is "aw"
>when followed by a double consonant, as explained
>below.) Long, initial, or stressed "i" and "e"
>(including "ea", "ee" "ie", etc.) are usually just
>written "y" with the context identifying what sound
>they represent. The exception is the "-ite" sound
>which is invariably written "ght" (with extensions
>such as "pint" -> "pghnt") as in "Y bght of py ynd y
>pghnt of yl byfor nghtfall." ("A bite of pie and a
>pint of ale before nightfall.")
>
>"a" represents just about any occurance of "oi", "ow",
>"au" or "ou" with "oil" being spelled "al" and "out
>house cow" spelled "at has ca." The exception is when
>it is followed by a double consonant, in which case it
>represents "aw" ("fall") or the "ah" in "pond"
>(spelled "pannt"). (Note that rather than doubling
>"th" in "father" the required "thth" is spelled "dd"
>as in "faddr". "Has" (English "house") should not be
>confused with "hzz" (English "has"), and "at" (English
>"out") should not be confused with "att" (English
>"at"). For example: "has" ("house"), "hzz" ("has"),
>"hyz" ("haze"), "hyzz" ("highs"), "hz" ("his").
>
>"gh" represents "f", except in the initial position
>where it is written "ph", or when it is followed by
>"t". Since "lght" could be both "light" and "lift"
>according to that rule, when "f" is followed by "t" it
>must be written "kh" so that "lift" -> "lkhtt". (Note
>that the "kh" is not doubled to indicate a short vowel
>preceeds it, instead the following consonant, "t" is
>doubled.)
>
Would a compound made of a word beggining in |ph| placed after another keep
the |ph| or would it change to |gh| for keeping it confusing and regular?
>Most short words (two, three and four letters) have
>arbitrary spelling that must simply be memorized,
>although they generally follow more of the rules than
>they break, except when they break more rules than
>they follow.
>
LOL "They follow more than they break unless they break more than they
follow"!
What's new in this isn't English like that for a lot of short words? ;)
>When two words are spelled the same it is often the
>case that one of them falls into disuse, being
>replaced by a new word or an existing synonym. For
>example, in final position the voiced/non-voiced
>distinction is seldom made out so that "pig" becomes
>"pgg", but "pick" also becomes "pgg", resulting in the
>eventual loss of the farm animal meaning of "pgg",
>which is replaced by "hagg" as in "Pgg wn yv td haggz
>t bochr fr td fyzd tmarro." ("Pick one of the hogs to
>butcher for the feast tomorrow.")
>
I thought you wanted ambiguty? ;P
The thing I notice is that you get stuck with a lot a words that are spelled
the same
In your example: "Pgg wn yv td haggz t bochr fr td fyzd tmarro."
"wn" may also be "won", "yv" may be "I've" (that's what I tought of first,
and I'd still do so considering the next rule for contractions), "td" may be
"toad", and "fr" may be "fry" (but it may have a regular spelling and be
spelled "phr" considering it's a less basic word)
You probably can't get rid of all words that are spelled the same
>Voiced "th" followed by a broad vowel is written "d".
>When that vowel is an "a" in conventional spelling the
>following consonant is doubled so "that" becomes
>"dtt". Contractions are made by attaching the
>contracted word to the following word, without
>apostrophe, rather than the preceeding word so that
>"that's enough" becomes "dtt syngh".
>
>"ng" is always pronounced "ing" when not preceeded by
>a vowel or followed by a consonant. "sing" -> "sng",
>but "song" would be "*sangng", ("a" followed by
>doubled consonant = "aw") except that the "ng" is not
>doubled. Instead, it is followed by "h" to indicated
>the equivalent of doubling so that "song" -> "sangh".
>(Note that "sanford" is "snghrt", so care must be
>taken to notice whether an "ngh" combination is parsed
>""ng+h" or "n+gh".) To differentiate between "sang"
>and "snag" the "n" is doubled to show that it stands
>apart from the "g" as in "snag" -> "snng". "sang" and
>"sung" are spelled "syng" and "syngh" for no
>particular reason, and must be learned by rote.
>
That's cool! All languages need some spellings that are there "for no
particular reason" ;-P
>(rule book continues for 147 more pages giving
>arbitrary rules and their many, many conflicting
>exceptions.)
Rly ytrstng! (Is that this?)
- Max
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:09:55 -0700
From: "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: All you (n)ever wanted to know about the Ferochromon
Over the years that Ebisédian made its infamous reputation, I've
received a number of requests for more information about the
Ferochromon, but I've never really taken it to heart to spend the time
to write down a lot of the details that went into it. This week,
however, I stumbled upon this Wikipedia entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conworld
which actually has a link to the Ferochromon page.
BUT...
I am rather disappointed at the tiny scale at which con-worlding is
depicted in this article: restricted mainly to a mere continent or
planet, or a modified clone of the Terran universe, such as Star Trek.
Surely I cannot be the only one who has created not merely puny
con-planets, but an entire universe with its own origins and physical
laws! Am I the only one to have invented an entire cosmological
history for a universe that isn't just a ripoff of the Terran
universe? I mean, the section on top-down con-worlding barely begins
to touch the kind of design that is far, far, beyond mere geographical
features and climates; the kind of detail and long-range design one
must consider in order for an entire universe to function!
Provoked by the trifling picture of con-worlding as depicted, I
decided to demonstrate what con-worlding means to me, by writing a
cosmological (internal) history of the Ferochromon that traces its
development all the way from time zero, the Ferochromon equivalent of
the Big Bang, to its full-fledged modern state of three Realms (three
entire universes, by comparison with the Terran universe!) complete
with realm-wide matter flows and countless landmasses, PLUS the three
Ethers and the Hyperether, which constitute the core of the
Ferochromon.
For the sake of keeping it to a sane length, I decided to omit the
history of the Ebisédi, which incidentally is already covered by
another document, and stick only to the large-scale physical structure
of the Ferochromon. Anyway, you may read it here:
http://conlang.eusebeia.dyndns.org/ferochromon/cosmohist.html
OK, now that I've finished my sales pitch, I'd like to apologize for
stepping on the toes of whoever wrote that article, who I suspect is a
list member, and also for the arrogant grandiosomanic tone I adopted.
:-) The Wikipedia article is really quite commendable; I overreacted
because it links to the Ferochromon pages YET fails to even mention,
for example, that con-worlding could very well involve the creation of
a Grand Unified Theory of Everything that, in the case of the
Ferochromon, explains the entire physical structure of the universe
from a single entity called the Ferochromon Element... OK, OK, I'll
step down from the soap box now. :-) You can read all about the gory
details of the Ferochromon that you (n)ever wanted to know at the
above link.
P.S. On an off-topic note, I'd just like to say that *this* is why
I've never even dared attempt to put equations to Ferochromon
physics... the design is so large and complex that I don't even know
where to begin. How does one go about writing equations for motion
through liquid space, for example? Or equations for entities that are
of indeterminate shape and extent? Or the kind of space that would be
formed when every point in it can potentially exhibit a different
number of dimensions? I gave up before I started. But nevertheless,
*I* think the qualitive description of the Ferochromon sure is
compelling! ;-) ;-) ;-)
P.S.S. And further apologies for posting this on CONLANG when it
really belongs in CONCULTURE or elsewhere. I just don't have the
energy to deal with another high-traffic forum, so I've decided to
stick with CONLANG and forget the rest.
T
--
Gone Chopin. Bach in a minuet.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:57:34 -0700
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another tongue-in-cheek spelling reform
--- # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gary Shannon wrote:
>
> >Rather than go in the direction of increased
> calrity
> >and phonetic precision, why not move in the
> direction
> >of increased ambiguity and phonetic confusion?
> >
>
> Great! I find it really more interesting than the
> reforms everybody talked
> about last days!
>
<snip>
>
> When a vowel is kept, should I infer it is the
> stressed one? the one that's
> important enough for deserving being kept?
>
> Or maybe not, it would too much regular :-P
>
That's what I had in mind.
<snip>
>
> Would a compound made of a word beggining in |ph|
> placed after another keep
> the |ph| or would it change to |gh| for keeping it
> confusing and regular?
>
Good question. I'm not sure.
> >Most short words (two, three and four letters) have
> >arbitrary spelling that must simply be memorized,
> >although they generally follow more of the rules
> than
> >they break, except when they break more rules than
> >they follow.
> >
>
> LOL "They follow more than they break unless they
> break more than they
> follow"!
>
<snip>
>
> The thing I notice is that you get stuck with a lot
> a words that are spelled
> the same
>
> In your example: "Pgg wn yv td haggz t bochr fr td
> fyzd tmarro."
>
> "wn" may also be "won", "yv" may be "I've" (that's
> what I tought of first,
> and I'd still do so considering the next rule for
> contractions), "td" may be
> "toad", and "fr" may be "fry" (but it may have a
> regular spelling and be
> spelled "phr" considering it's a less basic word)
>
> You probably can't get rid of all words that are
> spelled the same
>
Maybe "when" needs to be "wnn"?
I thought "toad" would be "tod" since I saved "o" for
all the rounded sort of vowel sounds.
As for "fry" I figured to keep terminal "y", so it
would be "phry".
<snip>
> >"sung" are spelled "syng" and "syngh" for no
> >particular reason, and must be learned by rote.
> >
>
Especially one as ambiguous as this!
> That's cool! All languages need some spellings that
> are there "for no
> particular reason" ;-P
>
> >(rule book continues for 147 more pages giving
> >arbitrary rules and their many, many conflicting
> >exceptions.)
>
> Rly ytrstng! (Is that this?)
>
> - Max
>
I might have gone with "ryly" for "really", since
initial, long, and stressed vowels are all spelled
"y". (Also, don't forget the "n" in yntrstng". :)
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 07:02:08 +0100
From: Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Number systems (was: Picto & Dil)
On Wednesday, April 20, 2005, at 01:29 , Henrik Theiling wrote:
> Ray writes in respose to me:
[snip]
>> I know - but I do not think either Fr Schleyer not Arie de Jong were
>> familiar with counting in east Asian langs :)
Apologies for the typo - I meant of course 'Fr Fr Schleyer _nor_ Arie de
Jong' - but looking at it again I think it ought t have been _or_ in any
case. What a mix-up of boolean operators!
> Ok, right. I should have thought of that. (Actually it surprised me
> too, when I learnt it -- and then the next step was to surprised me
> that I had never noticed that it was totally arbitrary to split
> numbers every *three* digits... :-) )
I've always assume it happened because 'mille' is the highest numeric word
in Latin and Roman numbers stop with M; then we start again and put a bar
over the lot to multiply it by 1000.
If Greek culture had had a significant effect on western & central
European culture, I suppose we might have counted in myriads (10000), but
even their numeric symbols only went up to 999; you then used the same
ones again, but with a mark to multiply them by 1000 - so I guess the
number symbols would still have suggested counting in 1000s :(
>> ...
>>> (The above number would be
>>> 'nine ten one two three four five six seven eight nine'
>>> in Tyl Sjok, BTW. Erm, with all words directly translated, of
>>> course. :-))
>>
>> In other words: 0.123456789e9 :-)
>
> 1.23456789e9, actually, but the principle is this, yes.
OOOPS - darn decimal point! Sorry - must've been a senior moment on my
part :)
So if 'nine ten one two three four five six seven eight nine' =
1.23456789e9, then do we just say (with direct translation) 'five ten one
two three four five six seven eight nine' to denote 1.23456789e5, thus
eliminating any need for a Tyl Sjok word for point/decimal/comma?
>
>> or, in Tyl Sjok:
>> {exponent} ten {mantissa}
>
> Exactly.
Nifty!
>> It's neat, but how easy this is the 'person in the street' I don't know
>> -
>> as you say there is a lack of empirical data :-)
>
> Hmm -- I don't think it's more complex to count the factors of ten
> instead of learning several words for a few of them. The 'person on
> the street' possibly just uses relatively small number words, and when
> getting exposed to larger ones, they'd hopefully not be scared away by
> a different type of number representation, because the one they'd use
> on the street is just the normal one.
Ooh - but they would IME - it's surprising the number of adults, in the UK
at least, that just have a mental block when it comes to anything
unfamiliar with numbers. It would be those brought up with the new system
that might find it easier, but......
>
> No empirical data, yes. I can only say that I *guess* that it's at
> most equally complex for the normal speaker to learn this -- if not
> easier.
Quite - without empirical data, it is guess work. I don't know how we
could go about getting empirical data. It would certainly be very
interesting IMO.
>> I guess if the exponent is greater than 9, then we'll have 'ten'
>> expressed
>> twice, for example
>> ten one two ten three four five six seven = 0.34567e12
>
> That's the point where it might get tricky for the ordinary speaker,
> right. But ask a person on the street to say the above number in his
> 'native' way in English... :-)))
Good point! Yes, once numbers get past a certain point they cease to mean
much more than "a terrifically large great big ginormous number of..."
:)
And those for whom actual precision is important would probably find the
mantissa-exponent method easier anyway.
> BTW: The Tyl-Sjok number is exactly right! See, it's easy! :-))))
> (But again, the mantissa should be shifted by one: 3.4567e12 equals
> that number in Tyl Sjok).
I agree on both points. :-)
>> They should certainly be aware of the problem if they are supposed to
>> global. But the prefixes for SI units are based on the 1000 division: ..
>> .
>> pico-, nano-, micro-, mili-, kilo-, mega-, giga- etc
OOPS - that should be milli- not mili-
> Ah -- right. Hmm, not nice to the east Asian languages -- do they use
> a different system? I guess not, right?
I guess not either. But it must be easier than working with a mile of 1760
yards or 5280 feet :)
What strikes me as inelegant is that all the prefixes that denote division
by a power of 1000 (or negative exponent) end in -o except for milli-;
likewise all the prefixes that denotes multiplying by powers of 1000 end
in -a except kilo- (which looks as tho it ought to belong to the former
group :)
As regards the latter, it has always seemed to me that the simple solution
is to ignore the strange Frenchified kilo- and revert to the proper Greek
chilia- (cf. the English words chiliad, chiliagon, chiliahedron etc).
As for milli-, a simple modification to millio- would suffice. Yep, I know
it would not be well formed from a purely Latin point of view - but then
neither are pico-, nano- or micro- :)
> (In Tyl Sjok, these prefixes just don't exist (by definition :-))).
> You'd use 1000m instead of 1km. This holds for whatever unit.)
But 1024b instead of 1Kb :)
>> and that might suggest keeping a similar system in an auxlang - but
>> I'll leave that to that other list ;)
>
> Right -- may this be discussed in that place! :-)
They actually _discuss_ things there now, do they (just kidding :)
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: 8
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 23:16:32 -0700
From: Vladimir Vysotsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: (in)perfective imperatives (was: past tense imperative)
Isaac Penzev wrote:
> I'm not a specialist in Russian, I'm merely a native speaker. So the
> distribution of perfective and imperfective imperative is a bit vague for
> me. Maybe I need to consult a good RuSL grammar book.
>
> Anyway, "marry me" is indeed in IA: _vykhodi za menya zamuzh_ (the verb is
> _vykhodi_ from INF _vykhodit'_). But "give me a loan of etc." would surely
> demand PA: _zaymi mne million_ (from _zanyat'_).
Yitzik, sorry for nitpicking, but
a) as for imperfective vs perfective, "vyjdi za menia" (P) and "vykhodi
za menia" (I) sound almost exactly the same to me, the perfective being
a bit more formal. Google confirms this: it finds 20000 "vyjdi" vs 30000
"vykhodi". Here are my examples of unequivocal choice between
imperfective and perfective for the same verb:
vyjdi von! / *vykhodi von! "get out of here!"
*vyjdi po odnomu! / vykhodi po odnomu! "exit one at a time!"
b) as a native speaker, you should be ashamed of "zajmi mne" :), which
is vernacular and not proper literary Russian; the correct usage is
"odolzhi" or "daj vzajmy".
Vlad
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 20:02:52 +1200
From: Wesley Parish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: All you (n)ever wanted to know about the Ferochromon
Actually, to cut to the quick on the equations thingee, I suspect that the
central equations of the Ferochromon would be a mixture of quantum mechanics
and the mathematical monsters that make up chaos theory and fractal geometry
- not all that different from the current cosmos, except for the serious
downgrading of gravity from a central part of the nature of matter, to an
incidental effect which explains why some things conglomerate and others
don't - the equivalent of the electroweak in this current cosmos.
(You've already indicated that the electroweak is incredibly strong in the
Ferochromon - it's the electrostrong that structures crystals in this current
cosmos, unless I've got it wrong. ;)
Just don't take my word for it.
Wesley Parish
On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:09, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> Over the years that Ebisédian made its infamous reputation, I've
> received a number of requests for more information about the
> Ferochromon, but I've never really taken it to heart to spend the time
> to write down a lot of the details that went into it. This week,
> however, I stumbled upon this Wikipedia entry:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conworld
>
> which actually has a link to the Ferochromon page.
>
> BUT...
>
> I am rather disappointed at the tiny scale at which con-worlding is
> depicted in this article: restricted mainly to a mere continent or
> planet, or a modified clone of the Terran universe, such as Star Trek.
> Surely I cannot be the only one who has created not merely puny
> con-planets, but an entire universe with its own origins and physical
> laws! Am I the only one to have invented an entire cosmological
> history for a universe that isn't just a ripoff of the Terran
> universe? I mean, the section on top-down con-worlding barely begins
> to touch the kind of design that is far, far, beyond mere geographical
> features and climates; the kind of detail and long-range design one
> must consider in order for an entire universe to function!
>
> Provoked by the trifling picture of con-worlding as depicted, I
> decided to demonstrate what con-worlding means to me, by writing a
> cosmological (internal) history of the Ferochromon that traces its
> development all the way from time zero, the Ferochromon equivalent of
> the Big Bang, to its full-fledged modern state of three Realms (three
> entire universes, by comparison with the Terran universe!) complete
> with realm-wide matter flows and countless landmasses, PLUS the three
> Ethers and the Hyperether, which constitute the core of the
> Ferochromon.
>
> For the sake of keeping it to a sane length, I decided to omit the
> history of the Ebisédi, which incidentally is already covered by
> another document, and stick only to the large-scale physical structure
> of the Ferochromon. Anyway, you may read it here:
>
> http://conlang.eusebeia.dyndns.org/ferochromon/cosmohist.html
>
>
>
> OK, now that I've finished my sales pitch, I'd like to apologize for
> stepping on the toes of whoever wrote that article, who I suspect is a
> list member, and also for the arrogant grandiosomanic tone I adopted.
>
> :-) The Wikipedia article is really quite commendable; I overreacted
>
> because it links to the Ferochromon pages YET fails to even mention,
> for example, that con-worlding could very well involve the creation of
> a Grand Unified Theory of Everything that, in the case of the
> Ferochromon, explains the entire physical structure of the universe
> from a single entity called the Ferochromon Element... OK, OK, I'll
> step down from the soap box now. :-) You can read all about the gory
> details of the Ferochromon that you (n)ever wanted to know at the
> above link.
>
> P.S. On an off-topic note, I'd just like to say that *this* is why
> I've never even dared attempt to put equations to Ferochromon
> physics... the design is so large and complex that I don't even know
> where to begin. How does one go about writing equations for motion
> through liquid space, for example? Or equations for entities that are
> of indeterminate shape and extent? Or the kind of space that would be
> formed when every point in it can potentially exhibit a different
> number of dimensions? I gave up before I started. But nevertheless,
> *I* think the qualitive description of the Ferochromon sure is
> compelling! ;-) ;-) ;-)
>
> P.S.S. And further apologies for posting this on CONLANG when it
> really belongs in CONCULTURE or elsewhere. I just don't have the
> energy to deal with another high-traffic forum, so I've decided to
> stick with CONLANG and forget the rest.
>
>
> T
>
> --
> Gone Chopin. Bach in a minuet.
--
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-----
Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui?
You ask, what is the most important thing?
Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata.
I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:57:31 -0400
From: Geoff Horswood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Announcement
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:03:24 -0400, Michael Potter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
[snip]
>
>I think it sounds OK. Not as nice as Latin, though.
>
>--
>Michael
In Xinkùtlan:
adzìlec kexìn (sutuàn)
/a'dzIl.ES kE'tSi:n sUt'wan/
at.dzìl.ec kexìn se.utuàn
PRS.possess.1pl(incl) father(archaic) GER.sacred
apudzùrimuc unùza ematapèitlu
/a.pu'dzur.I"muS U'nu.za E"ma.ta'pej.tKu/
at.pur.dzùra.imuc ur.nùza emata.pèi.tlu
PRS.PF.be_named.3sgl(hon) RPT.bless twelve.four.th
In Noygwexaal:
laa i-paapugwenx cuualajr
/la: i 'pa:.pu"gwEnT ku:'al"ajr/
laa i-paapu.gwenx cuual.ajr
1co SUBJ-sacred.father be_possessed.prs_3sgl(m)_2ev
a sacred father is possessed by us
puu-vatiirxalan rogen roq qaarqaargeron
/pu: va'ti:r"Ta.lan 'rO.gEn rOD Da:r'Da:rg.Er"On/
puur-vatiir.xalan rog.en roq qaar.qaarg.eron[1]
the(m) sixteen.name bless.doer 3sgl(n) CONT.take.prs_3sgl(n)_2ev
He is taking the sixteenth name Benedict
[1] No, this isn't a mistake. Doubling the first syllable of the stem is
how you form the continuous aspect. In the case of syllables ending in a
cluster, only the first consonant is taken on the doubling.
I've also used the 3rd person single nomenclative gender pronoun _roq_,
which is an archaism not used in everyday speech, but fits the
liturgical/formal usage here.
Has anyone else developed archaic or particular forms for use in high
formal or liturgical contexts?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 11:55:05 -0700
From: "H. S. Teoh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: All you (n)ever wanted to know about the Ferochromon
On Thu, Apr 21, 2005 at 08:02:52PM +1200, Wesley Parish wrote:
> Actually, to cut to the quick on the equations thingee, I suspect that the
> central equations of the Ferochromon would be a mixture of quantum mechanics
> and the mathematical monsters that make up chaos theory and fractal geometry
> - not all that different from the current cosmos, except for the serious
> downgrading of gravity from a central part of the nature of matter, to an
> incidental effect which explains why some things conglomerate and others
> don't - the equivalent of the electroweak in this current cosmos.
Hmm. The prob is, there *is* no gravity in Ferochromon! Well, unless
you rationalize convergences as gravity... hmm. But then how do you
fit in other stuff like divergences? Anti-gravity?
> (You've already indicated that the electroweak is incredibly strong in the
> Ferochromon - it's the electrostrong that structures crystals in this current
> cosmos, unless I've got it wrong. ;)
[...]
Oh? How did I indicate that electroweak is incredibly strong in
Ferochromon? I wasn't aware there's anything analogous to electroweak
in Ferochromon. :-) Now, FE mode, OTOH, might very well be QCD... but
I don't know about the other forces.
T
--
Why do conspiracy theories always come from the same people??
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:07:31 +0200
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Examples wanted: How do you say this?
Quoting Geoff Horswood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:20:08 -0700, Gregory Gadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >> Hey!
> >>
> >> I guess Ayeri would "shoot with canons on sparrows"[1]
> >
> >-snip-
> >
> >> [1] I didn't find a translation for "mit Kanonen auf Spatzen
> >> schießen" in my dictionary. It means that you use all the
> >> power of a method for something for which an easier method
> >> would have worked as well, maybe even better.
> >
> >Heh, my conculture has a similar expression: dife'llan büshaxhe
> >dhichol-ainom "to hunt squirrel with a catapult."
> >
> >Gregg Gadow
>
> The Xinkutlan say "to kill lice with a hammer"
I'm tempted to make the Tairezan equivalent something like "nuking a planet to
eliminate a lawyer".
Andreas
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:35:51 -0700
From: Gregory Gadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Examples wanted: How do you say this?
> Quoting Geoff Horswood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> On Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:20:08 -0700, Gregory Gadow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >> Hey!
>> >>
>> >> I guess Ayeri would "shoot with canons on sparrows"[1]
>> >
>> >-snip-
>> >
>> >> [1] I didn't find a translation for "mit Kanonen auf Spatzen
>> >> schießen" in my dictionary. It means that you use all the
>> >> power of a method for something for which an easier method
>> >> would have worked as well, maybe even better.
>> >
>> >Heh, my conculture has a similar expression: dife'llan büshaxhe
>> >dhichol-ainom "to hunt squirrel with a catapult."
>> >
>> >Gregg Gadow
>>
>> The Xinkutlan say "to kill lice with a hammer"
>
> I'm tempted to make the Tairezan equivalent something like "nuking a
> planet to eliminate a lawyer".
A lawyer? That would be worth the price, and a bargain if there are two
lawyers dirtside! (Just kidding! I deeply respect lawyers, please don't
sue me.)
Gregg Gadow
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
