There are 11 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
From: Chris Peters
2a. Re: Väder/ kläd er på nors k
From: Even Eclectic Tolo Dybevik
3.1. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: BPJ
3.2. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: R A Brown
3.3. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
3.4. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
From: Brian
4a. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
From: R A Brown
4b. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
From: Wesley Parish
4c. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
From: Wesley Parish
4d. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
5. New Blog Post: Moten Part IV
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
Posted by: "Chris Peters" [email protected]
Date: Sun Dec 11, 2011 8:15 pm ((PST))
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: A sort of "lexicalized syntax"-- has this been done before?
> To: [email protected]
>
> I was reading "Atoms of Language" and got the idea from the book to create a
> conlang where basic word order (SVO, OVS, OSV, etc) depended on the
> particular
> verb and the branching direction depended on the particular adjective (some
> branch left, some right). E.g. sentences with the verb "to eat" might be OVS,
> but
> sentences with the main verb "to snore" might be OSV.
>
> I think the author said this was unattested in natlangs. Has it already been
> done
> conlangs?
>
Only related feature I can think of -- and this is a borderline comparison at
best -- in Romance languages the object moves before the verb, if the object is
a pronoun. And the verb moves before the subject if the sentence is a
question. Probably not what is being looked for, however. :Chris
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Väder/ kläd er på nors k
Posted by: "Even Eclectic Tolo Dybevik" [email protected]
Date: Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:30 pm ((PST))
It's "Det finnes ikke dårlig vær, bare dårlige klær." I know cause' I'm
norwegian, and I live in a city with a lof of bad weather! So I hear that a lot.
> Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 16:37:32 -0500
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Väder/kläd er på nors k
> To: [email protected]
>
> Okay, so I'm watching this TV program about the joys of Norway, they're
> talking about what sturdy Viking stock Norwegians are made of and how they
> have school-age children romping about in inclement weather conditions to
> toughen 'em up, and this one Norwegian guy says, "In Norway, we have a
> saying: 'There is no bad weather, only bad clothing.'" So, like the good
> linguophile that I am, I scream at the television,"What is it in Norwegian,
> you git?!" But then I figured that I ought to be able to do this myself. So I
> hit the dictionary and find that "vær" and "klær" are rhymes, and assume that
> if this is something you blithely goad shivering, kvetching Norwegian
> children with, it must be a pithy little couplet.
>
> On my first run, I ended up with:
>
> Det finnes inget dåligt vær,
> Det finnes bare dålige klær.
>
> I then run a google search to see if I'm close, and I find the Swedish:
>
> Det finns inget dåligt väder, bara dåliga kläder.
>
> Which appears to be the way one says it, so a partial 'hurrah' for me. So,
> trying to Norwegize it, I try:
>
> Det finnes inget dåligt vær, bare dålige klær.
>
> Further peregrination on Google reveals that you don't add neuter "-t" in
> Norwegian on adjs. ending in "-ig", "-t", or "-sk" (who knew?), so I guess
> there's no "västkustskt kök" for Norwegians, only "vestkystsk" :(
>
> So,
>
> 1) Det finnes inget dålig vær, bare dålige klær. My question is, is this it?
> Google translation, which is hardly the final arbiter, offered: 2) Det finnes
> ikke dålig vær, bare dålige klær. Which is fine, but not exactly the same. Is
> 1) grammatically valid, and 2) is just the way it's said, or is 1) off
> somehow? ObConlang: In Géarthnuns: Fe gdonögs vebuteg (la), arzhö sa aléhans
> vebuten la miçnakh.indef.art.-neg. weather-nom./neg. bad-nom./neg.
> (aux.-pres), but indef.art.-aff. clothing-nom./aff. bad-nom./aff. pres. exist
> You can drop the first "la" with an added comma: Fe gdonögs vebuteg, arzhö sa
> aléhans vebuten, la miçnakh. Kou
>
>
>
>
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3.1. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "BPJ" [email protected]
Date: Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:12 pm ((PST))
Dear Ray,
it seems you and I never really disagreed. My first
mail in this thread was in response to what
G. van der Vegt wrote:
On 2011-12-10 09:17, G. van der Vegt wrote:
> This isn't limited to Death either, there's many similarish
concepts
> that tend towards being assigned a grammatical gender. I think
it have
> to do with the days where these concepts where regularly
personified.
>
I can see now why you found what I wrote nonsensical in
the context of what you wrote, for which I'm deeply sorry.
I guess I overreacted to the above quote from GvdW because
I'm deeply allergic to using Mumbo Jumbo as an 'explanation'
to anything in anthropology -- clearly that should be the
last resort, if any last resort rather than "we can't know"
is really needed.
Yours,
/bpj
P.S. As for the Vedic root nouns they were assigned
gender based on their meaning/relation to the active
verb: action nouns were feminine and agent nouns
were masculine -- nothing to do with personification
of course! I'm deeply convinced that the association
of grammatical gender with biological gender in PIE
was secondary. Note that the Anatolian lgs had only
a common and a neuter gender, which probably reflects
the original state of affairs before _*H2_ fused with
the preceding vowel. But it's not there the controversy
between us lies, I hope!
On 2011-12-11 10:24, R A Brown wrote:
> On 10/12/2011 22:20, BPJ wrote:
>> On 2011-12-10 21:39, R A Brown wrote:
> [snip]
>> ............. True there is no grammatical or semantic
>> 'reason' why those suffixes or any word denoting an
>> inanimate should be associated with masculine or
>> feminine gender, but they were, and often on the basis of
>> sharing a suffix with some other word. As for true root
>> nouns in Indo-European those in Vedic were feminine when
>> nomina actionis and masculine when nomina agentis. If
>> that was because of some analogy or because Vedic poets
>> were preoccupied with male actors I don't know.
>
> I.e. true, in fact, that you have not answered my original
> question which, admittedly, I was addressing to conlangs
> rather than natlangs.
>
> If you recall, I initially pointed out that St Francis sang
> about 'Sister Death' not because of some feeling of
> pro-feminism or any modern concept, but simply because _la
> morte_ is grammatically feminine. Had Francis been German
> rather than Italian he would have sung of 'Brother Death' -
> but he wasn't.
>
> That, surely, _agrees_ with what you earlier wrote:
> "Death/time/whatever became male or female because the word
> for it had a certain grammatical gender, not the other way
> around!" - which is precisely what I said.
>
> I merely observed that even in languages like Latin, Greek,
> German and Russian, which possess a neuter gender, 'death'
> and many other concepts were assigned masculine or feminine
> _grammatical gender_. I merely asked, because this is after
> all a *conlang* list, what criteria conlangers used in
> assigning gender in a conlang with a grammatical gender system.
>
> OK - even if most of the gender assignments in IE languages
> are ultimately due to that of formative suffixes, you do
> seem to admit that some, at least, were roots words which
> did carry gender. But the formative suffix explanation
> merely pushes the question back one stage, not answer it.
> Why did various formative suffixes confer a particular
> grammatical gender on a noun?
>
> But, as I say, I was addressing the question to conlangs
> rather than natlangs such as the IE and Semitic ones.
>
> [snip]
>>> die- (diÄs, diÄs) normally masculine, with singular
>>> sometimes treated as feminine if it refers to a
>>> specific day?
>>
>> No idea, but both _di_ and feminine _dia_ occur in
>> Romance -- even both in the same language in Old
>> Occitan/Provençal! Perhaps some funniness of that
>> conlang Written Latin going on. After all all other words
>> of the fifth declension are feminine, so perhaps _dies_
>> became masculine on analogy with some lost word,
>
> Indeed, all other 5th declension nouns are feminine, thus
> one would have expected _diÄs_ to be feminine, and it was
> almost certainly the 'feminine attraction' that accounts the
> use in the singular when referring to a specific day. But
> the word held onto its 'masculinity' in most contexts and
> its descendants in Spanish and Portuguese still do: el día,
> o día.
>
> But, methinks, there is more than just derived gender,
> formative suffixes etc going on. We do find examples of
> gender change. It is well known that Latin neuters normally
> became masculines in the Romancelangs. So we find Latin
> _mare_ "sea" turning up dutifully as Italian _il mare_,
> Spanish _el mar_ and Portuguese _o mar_ - but the French and
> Romanians feminize it, thus: _la mer_, _marea_ (final -a
> being the feminine article). Analogy with _terra_ "earth"
> is the usual explanation. But why only French & Romanian
> and not the others?
>
> The Latin _pÅns, pontis_ "bridge" is masculine (why?) and
> generally retains that gender in Romance, hence. e.g. French
> _le pont_. But in Portuguese it is feminine _a ponte_.
> Also the word was borrowed by the ancient Brits and survives
> in modern Welsh as the feminine _pont_ "bridge" ~ y bont
> "the bridge" (feminine nouns have 'soft mutation' after the
> definite article.
>
> So IMO there is more going on than just gender of formative
> suffixes.
>
> But:
>>>
>>> What determines gender assignment of _monomorphemic_
>>> words/stems in naturalistic conlangs?
>>
>> The whim of the author, obviously, as always in
>> conlangs.
>
> With respect, that is a non-answer. At that level we may as
> well not ask any conlanger why s/he does this, that or the
> other. "Oh, it's just my whim."
>
> OK - I'll put it another way. "Why whim cause you, dear
> conlanger, to assign grammatical gender to objects 7 other
> concepts in your conlang?"
>
>> Anyway the 'reason' why _morte_ is feminine in Italian
>> is lost in prehistory, and was not caused by anyone
>> imagining personified Death as female. Believing that is
>> to put the cart before the horse.
>
> Where, in this thread, did anyone actually suggest this!
>
> Let me summarize what I _did_ say:
>
> 1. St Francis personified Death as 'Sister Death' because
> _morte_ has feminine gender in Italian.
>
> 2. Italian _morte_ is feminine because it is derived from
> Latin _mors, mortis_ which was also feminine.
>
> 3. Why, as Latin has a neuter gender, did it make _mors_
> feminine? [Your answer: because it contains the formative
> suffix -t-. My supplementary question: Why does that make
> it feminine? Note: I say _feminine_ (grammatical), *not*
> female.]
>
> 4. What factor/ consideration/ whim determines _grammatical
> gender_ in conlangs that have such gender?
>
> {Sigh}
>
> I was merely trying to give an off-topic subject a _conlang
> twist_ because I was under the impression that this was a
> conlang list! But over recent months it seems that
> whenever I try to do this my words inevitably get
> misunderstood or misrepresented - which I find very tedious.
>
> As someone wrote to me privately quite recently "I'm not
> sure why it seems to be open season on you right now."
>
Messages in this topic (41)
________________________________________________________________________
3.2. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:32 pm ((PST))
On 11/12/2011 14:35, Brian wrote:
> As for the natlang side of grammatical gender I have no
> explanation.
>
[snip]
> different grammatical gender endings). Although for my
> conlangs I never use the terms "gender", "masculine",
> "feminine", "neuter", I use the terms class because I
> can't conceive of why "gender" should be used.
<-- French _genre_ <-- Vulgar Latin *genere (Classical Latin
_genus_ [nom.], _generis_ [gen.]) = "race, stock, species,
kind, class."
I.e. the word once meant _class_; the change to meaning
_sex_ has happened during my life-time. Once upon a time,
not so long ago, the box one filled in as 'male' or 'female'
on forms was invariably labeled "sex" - now the modern label
is always "gender."
When I learnt Latin & French in the 1950s gender and sex
were not confused. Whether one was male or female was what
one's sex was; whether _table_ was masculine or feminine in
Latin or French was a question of its gender, i.e. "class."
Why this the useful distinction between sex and gender has
become confused, I don't know. It's almost as tho 'gender'
is being used as a euphemism for the "vulgar" sounding 'sex'
- which IMO is silly.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (41)
________________________________________________________________________
3.3. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [email protected]
Date: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:36 am ((PST))
On 12 December 2011 08:32, R A Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Why this the useful distinction between sex and gender has
> become confused, I don't know. It's almost as tho 'gender'
> is being used as a euphemism for the "vulgar" sounding 'sex'
> - which IMO is silly.
>
>
Mainly because sex and gender are not confused, but have started to refer
to different facets of sexuality: sex is about the physical attributes,
gender about the psychological and social reality, which may or may not be
in line with the physical one. Since those are different (and not
necessarily related) matters, it makes sense that they should be indicated
using different words. "Gender" was the best choice, given its grammatical
use. "Sex" isn't used not because it's "vulgar", but because it refers to
something else than what the forms you're referring to are asking.
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (41)
________________________________________________________________________
3.4. Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
Posted by: "Brian" [email protected]
Date: Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:19 am ((PST))
Vulgar comment alert in this message!!! Not intended to offend!!!
Okay, that explains the term 'gender' nicely. Thank you for that. However, why
are the terms 'masculine' and 'feminine' used as opposed to other possible
class/type/kind/gender distinctions? I mean, we could use the gender labels
'high' and 'low' or possibly 'class 1' and 'class 2', etc. I can't remember how
many times I've been talking to someone about grammatical gender and had to use
the phrase, "Just because it's called masculine doesn't mean it has balls!"
I am being serious about this. I really don't understand the purpose of the
current terminology when other just as suitable terminology could be used with
less ambiguity.
-----Original Message-----
From: R A Brown <[email protected]>
Sender: Constructed Languages List <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 07:32:24
To: <[email protected]>
Reply-To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Chat. Don't join if you don't have the stomach for it.
On 11/12/2011 14:35, Brian wrote:
> As for the natlang side of grammatical gender I have no
> explanation.
>
[snip]
> different grammatical gender endings). Although for my
> conlangs I never use the terms "gender", "masculine",
> "feminine", "neuter", I use the terms class because I
> can't conceive of why "gender" should be used.
<-- French _genre_ <-- Vulgar Latin *genere (Classical Latin
_genus_ [nom.], _generis_ [gen.]) = "race, stock, species,
kind, class."
I.e. the word once meant _class_; the change to meaning
_sex_ has happened during my life-time. Once upon a time,
not so long ago, the box one filled in as 'male' or 'female'
on forms was invariably labeled "sex" - now the modern label
is always "gender."
When I learnt Latin & French in the 1950s gender and sex
were not confused. Whether one was male or female was what
one's sex was; whether _table_ was masculine or feminine in
Latin or French was a question of its gender, i.e. "class."
Why this the useful distinction between sex and gender has
become confused, I don't know. It's almost as tho 'gender'
is being used as a euphemism for the "vulgar" sounding 'sex'
- which IMO is silly.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (41)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:44 pm ((PST))
On 11/12/2011 14:20, Sam Stutter wrote:
[snip]
> I'm going to apply Lesson 5 of Xenolinguistics here "if
> thereâs any sign of females, their names will end in an
> unstressed -a". I totally do this all the time too.
I think you are probably right with the list I've snipped.
But to totally do that all the time with natangs, at least,
will not give correct results, nor will it, I suspect, with
conlangs.
I remember, many years ago when I taught Latin, a young
student getting more and more puzzled as he translated a
passage from Cicero. Finally he realized that _Dolabella_
was a male!
In fact quite a few names of males end in unstressed -a in
Latin.
But maybe in that branch of conlangs known as _exolangs_
"if thereâs any sign of females, their names will end in an
unstressed -a" is a truism. If this is so, IMO it shows an
remarkable lack of imagination among the authors of those
conlangs.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
There's none too old to learn.
[WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
Posted by: "Wesley Parish" [email protected]
Date: Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:35 am ((PST))
Well, actually, the humans concerned are in a cosmic cul-se-sac at
the junction of several universes, and have some sort of access to
different timelines, that is, they can switch (provisional) timelines
with the genders resulting from one timeline also switching. They
also have the option of becoming neuter, for which the personal
pronoun is ae, aer, which I grabbed from A Voyage to Arcturus by
David Lindsay.
Most of the people with names ending in the -ia formation are female,
though Anaia and Irianaia were a married couple with children
begotten in the normal manner: I at this moment am far from sure who
was what when. I think Anaia had most of them - at any rate, ae is
the current midwife of aer House.
Itudoia was male the last time I wrote anything, and Odayi was his
male friend, who was steadily falling deeper in love with him. The
problem was that Utudoia, being highly conservative, couldn't imagine
marriage without children, so Odayi eventually switched personal
timelines and gender and became Rebaiohh - the doubled -hh is the
visarga. The central character of the story, Bitanaia, is Rebaiohh's
son by Itudoia.
Karyl and Daryl and John and Bin Boutros are the originals in this
cul-de-sac, three thousand prime sequences ago - John was the
discoverer of the switching timelines, except his accidental
discovery used more energy than required, so they were left with John
and his first perself Ivanna. Ivanna was curious - and furious with
her pre-self John - and she bifurcated as well, bringing her own
first perself Johanna into the story. Jean is a (much) later
bifurcation of John, and is just as arrogant: Antaia is her daughter,
though at the time the story starts, she is neuter and serving in the
Enclave's Guard - Guard are neuter.
Bitanaia aka Unrudna becomes Antaia's husband. (Unrudna seems to mean
something like "handyman/person", -nda and -dna are intensifiers, so
unru- and unri- mean "randomly skilled". itud- and itur- means
"highly specifically skilled" - Itudoia was in training to become a
doctor.)
Which gender Karyl and Daryl are at any one point in time is
problematic. Children are neuter, and that's because a fetus randomly
switching timeline and gender inside the mother, is guaranteed to be
bad news. Coming of age is accompanied by the choice of a primary
gender, and is celebrated with the usual coming-of-age party.
Anastasaia was the child of Daryl and Ivanna; the name has undergone
changes over the prime sequences, and been (mis)interpreted by the
generations following - naturally. I had a bit of fun. :)
Glad you enjoyed it!
Wesley Parish
On 12/12/2011, at 3:20 AM, Sam Stutter wrote:
> I'm guessing it's a human narrative, so may I inquire after the
> genders of the names?
>
> On 11 Dec 2011, at 13:07, Wesley Parish wrote:
>
>> I've been working on a novel of sorts for the last few years, and
>> have decided to work out the language behind the names. this is
>> the current state of the names:
>>
>> -aia formation
>> Anaia
>> Antaia
>> Irianaia
>> Bitanaia
>> Anastasaia
>> Apaia
>> Jenaia
>> Menaia
>
> Female, right?
>
>>
>> -oia formation
>> Itudoia
>
> I'm going to apply Lesson 5 of Xenolinguistics here "if thereâs
> any sign of females, their names will end in an unstressed -a". I
> totally do this all the time too. In fact, the Nỳspekè "zhenkhe
> selhisaeyè (titular class) declensions all have the nominative
> suffix +ìa
>
>>
>> -eia formation
>> Kereia
>>
>> -ais formation
>> Farais
>>
>> -in formation
>> Keruin
>> Bin
>> Jean
>
> Probably male? Sounds like one name actually, "Jean bin Keruin"
>
>>
>> -iun formation
>> Edeiun
>> Maiun
>> Biennuiun
>>
>> -yi formation
>> Odayi
>
> Female? Sort of, I don't know, "ethnic" / "elvish" /
> "enchantress" / "tribal"? :-P
>
>>
>> -aiohh formation
>> Rebaiohh
>
> At first glance this looks remarkably Gaelic. How is it pronounced?
>
>>
>> -na formation
>> Teraiana
>> Ivanna
>> Johanna
>>
>> -nza formation
>> Firanza
>>
>> -u formation
>> En Vilou
>
> Looks French. Again, what's the pronunciation? I can imagine a
> Firanza en Vilou living in a Parisian appartement. She's possibly
> steampunk and may well fight crime with some sort of talking animal
> sidekick... Um... if you see that name turn up in print anywhere it
> *definitely* wasn't me who stole it :)
>
>>
>> -yl formation
>> Karyl
>> Daryl
>
> Male, I'm guessing.
>
>>
>> -ya formation
>> Meya
>> Bituya
>>
>> -ye formation
>> Antuye
>>
>> -we formation
>> Bitewe
>
>
>>
>> -os formation
>> Boutros
>>
>> -an formation
>> Geman
>
> The two above are male villains? Boutros runs an evil
> multinational, Geman is his deformed hitman-butler. Again, I *do
> not* intend to steal any of these :)
>
> I'm being facetious of course, I *have* read the bit below.
>
>>
>> most of the formations are adjectival and most seem to derive from
>> a common basis, the Vowel-semiVowel-Vowel form. the -ye, -ya, and -
>> we forms are diminutive and intimate and are generally used by
>> mothers or lovers, though Meya is a non-diminutive. it is likely
>> that the -yi formation is a diminutive form that has taken on non-
>> diminutive status over time.
>
> Are you able to generate names on the fly yet?
>
>>
>> The only four names I know something of the meaning of, are
>> Bitanaia - ticklish, with all its diminutives, Bituya (a lover's
>> intimate diminutive) and Bitewe (a mother's affectionate
>> diminutive); Antaia (high-spirited),with its diminutive Antuye, a
>> lover's intimate diminutive; and Geman-Menaia, where Geman -
>> worthy - loses its adjectival ending -aia when in apposition to
>> another adjective - Menaia - loving, the whole name becoming a
>> rough equivalent of Amanda - Worthy of being loved/lovable.
>
> Are these rules applied universally? Or are there different rules
> for the different genders? Or for different name origins (like
> English stem changing verbs)? Or for cases?
>
>> And Anastasaia - this is horribly politically incorrect - an, ana
>> generally means "high", in the physical and various metaphorical
>> senses. stas and stasi generally refers to the female bosom.
>> Anastasaia is generally regarded as one of the "mothers" of all
>> the humans in the Enclave, a region of almost-space trapped
>> between various aspects of various pre-universes' membranes, and
>> while some would consider that the meaning of her name refers to
>> her nurturing side, others with equal justification, consider it
>> refers to her sexual pride and appetite. I am a mere chronicler,
>> and would not wish to choose either side. :)
>
> Yeah, yeah, that's what they all say. Have you read any essays on
> the author and reader as voyeurs? :-P
>
>>
>> As yet there are no texts. these names are all there currently is.
>>
>> Wesley Parish
>
> Anyway, GTG. I've got this really good idea for a series of
> steampunk crime short-stories set in Paris :)
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
Posted by: "Wesley Parish" [email protected]
Date: Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:54 am ((PST))
FWIW, Dana in Lithuanian or Latvian, I forget which, is a male name.
And following the Romance languages lead, one might decide that all
names ending in -o are male - but in one of my stories, both the male
and the female have names ending in -o - Praleyo (the male) and
Vheratsho (the female).
I think the " -a equals female gender" is mostly a Romance language
habit. (With an infusion of various Semitic influences - Arabic,
Hebrew, even Aramaic.)
Just my 0.02c worth
Wesley Parish
On 12/12/2011, at 8:44 PM, R A Brown wrote:
> On 11/12/2011 14:20, Sam Stutter wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> I'm going to apply Lesson 5 of Xenolinguistics here "if
>> theres any sign of females, their names will end in an
>> unstressed -a". I totally do this all the time too.
>
> I think you are probably right with the list I've snipped.
> But to totally do that all the time with natangs, at least,
> will not give correct results, nor will it, I suspect, with
> conlangs.
>
> I remember, many years ago when I taught Latin, a young
> student getting more and more puzzled as he translated a
> passage from Cicero. Finally he realized that _Dolabella_
> was a male!
>
> In fact quite a few names of males end in unstressed -a in
> Latin.
>
> But maybe in that branch of conlangs known as _exolangs_
> "if theres any sign of females, their names will end in an
> unstressed -a" is a truism. If this is so, IMO it shows an
> remarkable lack of imagination among the authors of those
> conlangs.
>
> --
> Ray
> ==================================
> http://www.carolandray.plus.com
> ==================================
> Nid rhy hen neb i ddysgu.
> There's none too old to learn.
> [WELSH PROVERB]
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
4d. Re: fragments of new conlang: chrestomathy thereof
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [email protected]
Date: Mon Dec 12, 2011 3:49 am ((PST))
On 12 December 2011 09:56, Wesley Parish <[email protected]> wrote:
> FWIW, Dana in Lithuanian or Latvian, I forget which, is a male name.
In Slavic languages, shortened forms of male names often end in unstressed
-a, like Sasha, from Aleksandr, or Pasha, from Pavel, or even Vanya from
Ivan.
In Moten, names are generally epicene, like everything in the language.
Gender is just not marked. The only exception is in the diminutive suffixes
-mas (masculine) and -zes (feminine). There is no specific connotation of
femininity in nouns that end in -a (the fact that _di|la_ means "mother" is
a coincidence. "aunt", for instance, is _di|luko_ or _ge|samo_ -
respectively maternal and paternal -, both ending in -o).
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. New Blog Post: Moten Part IV
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [email protected]
Date: Mon Dec 12, 2011 5:29 am ((PST))
Hi everyone,
After nearly two years in the making, I've finally managed to publish a new
blog post about Moten grammar, entitled: "Moten, Part IV: Verbs and Main
Clauses"! In it I finally describe the deceptively simple Moten verbal
system, with its 36 periphrastic forms :P (and with one example per form!).
Probably the main draw for this post is that I finally added a lot of
example sentences, so that you can see how the language works in practice.
For the rest, I think this is the longest post I've ever written. I believe
it's nicely structured though, and should be readable.
The post is available directly at
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/2011/12/moten-part-iv-verbs-and-main-clauses.htmlor
through my blog's main page's address as given in my signature. As
usual, if you have any comment/question/remark, don't hesitate to post a
comment on my blog, or reply to this post. I hope you'll find it
interesting. Some people have complained about the lack of replies to
conlang-related posts lately, so let's see how this one fares! :P
If you want to (re-)read the previous posts on Moten, they are available
directly at the following pages:
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/2009/12/moten
-part-i-background-and-phonology.html
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/2009/12/moten
-part-ii-nouns-and-pronouns.html
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/2010/01/moten-part-iii-counting.html
In the next post about Moten (which hopefully will not take two years this
time!), I'll talk about subordinate clauses and the use of _atom_: to be
and _agem_: to have, the two auxiliaries, as fully-fledged verbs. There are
a few surprises there, so stay tuned!
--
Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets.
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/
http://www.christophoronomicon.nl/
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> 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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
