There are 8 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: internal reconstruction starting from Proto-Indo-European
From: A. da Mek
2a. Re: Language that Don't Change
From: Sam Stutter
2b. Re: Language that Don't Change
From: Tony Harris
3. The Yardish Writing System
From: Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
4a. Re: NATLANG: Amharic, and Ethiopian local languages
From: Wesley Parish
4b. Re: NATLANG: Amharic, and Ethiopian local languages
From: Sam Stutter
4c. Re: NATLANG: Amharic, and Ethiopian local languages
From: Paul Bennett
5. New Blog Post: Moten Part VI: Negation and Polar Questions
From: Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1. Re: internal reconstruction starting from Proto-Indo-European
Posted by: "A. da Mek" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 1:46 am ((PST))
> there is no way of reconstructing such a language (essentially,
internal reconstruction starting from Proto-Indo-European) in
so much detail that one could actually write texts in it.
Why not? Of course, we cannot reconstruct such PIE and Pre-PIE that could be
successfully used by chrononauts to communicate with our ancestors in Our
TimeLine, because the sound changes are not lossless and thus we cannot
guess the unique word of several other possibilities which would give the
same output, but for the purpose of conlanging we can simply choose one of
them which we like. We can use any word that passed through the known sound
changes gives the word which is attested in the corresponding natural
language.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Language that Don't Change
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 1:48 am ((PST))
On 7 Feb 2012, at 01:48, Matthew Boutilier <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I have to admit I've always wondered what the Gallifreyan language would
>> be like, given exactly that issue.
>>
>
> too bad the TARDIS will just translate it into contemporary english for you.
I don't want to be all Doctor-Who-geek here, but the TARDIS doesn't translate
Gallifreyan: it automatically assumes you can (what with being a Time Lord and
all). Also, didn't the Doctor have to take night-classes in High Gallifreyan?
>
> matt
>
> On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 7:33 PM, Tony Harris <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I have to admit I've always wondered what the Gallifreyan language would
>> be like, given exactly that issue.
>>
>>
>> On 02/06/2012 07:22 PM, kechpaja wrote:
>>
>>> Not exactly the same thing, but I've had this idea bouncing around for a
>>> while, so I figured I'd share it: How about a language spoken by time
>>> travelers (or some similarly temporally non-linear people), whose past and
>>> future were constantly interacting? My idea — or at least the idea I'm
>>> using as I implement this language — is that it would evolve not over time
>>> but along some dimension that lies at a right angle to time. Depending on
>>> the distribution of the speakers, and whether they prefered to move around
>>> in space or through time, the language might even change primarily over
>>> space rather than time.
>>>
>>> Just something interesting to explore...
>>>
>>> -Kelvin
>>>
>>
Messages in this topic (18)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Language that Don't Change
Posted by: "Tony Harris" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 6:45 am ((PST))
On 02/07/2012 04:47 AM, Sam Stutter wrote:
> On 7 Feb 2012, at 01:48, Matthew Boutilier<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I have to admit I've always wondered what the Gallifreyan language would
>>> be like, given exactly that issue.
>>>
>> too bad the TARDIS will just translate it into contemporary english for you.
> I don't want to be all Doctor-Who-geek here, but the TARDIS doesn't translate
> Gallifreyan: it automatically assumes you can (what with being a Time Lord
> and all). Also, didn't the Doctor have to take night-classes in High
> Gallifreyan?
>
I remember the first part of that from the recent episode where we saw
Gallifreyan writing on the outside of that cradle. I don't remember the
second, when was that stated?
I do have to say that Gallifreyan as written in that episode is
dramatically different than Gallifreyan as written in the first episode
of "The Deadly Assassin" from the classic series with the 4th Doctor.
As much as I love the classic series, I think the new portrayal of
written Gallifreyan is much classier.
But yes, I believe as you say that the TARDIS only translates every
other language into something its passengers' minds can deal with, it
does not translate Gallifreyan. Or did River say it takes it a lot
longer to figure out you can't understand Gallifreyan so it doesn't
auto-translate the written form?
Messages in this topic (18)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. The Yardish Writing System
Posted by: "Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 1:48 am ((PST))
What should the Yardish writing system look like? I'm thinking diferent shapes
for letters, but since I don't think there is an accessible drawing program out
there, what do I do? Since my first writing system was braille, I'm thinking
the shapes run horrizontal. So how do I reproduce the writing system?
Nicole Andrews
Pen name Mellissa Green
Budding novelist
Tweet me
@greenNovelist
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: NATLANG: Amharic, and Ethiopian local languages
Posted by: "Wesley Parish" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 2:33 am ((PST))
There is a Colloquial Amharic available:
http://www.amazon.com/Colloquial-Amharic-David-Appleyard/dp/0415100054
http://books.google.co.nz/books/about/Colloquial_Amharic.html?
id=EzQ2s-bLRiIC&redir_esc=y
http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415100038/
It includes an audio CD as standard. I don't know whether or not it
is still in print as of today, but The Colloquial [Language] series
is a very good and useful series IMO. They start from the rudimentary
" Hi, my name is such-and-such, and you name is?" to discussing
various topics of interest. Recommended.
I have no knowledge of the Oro River languages, sorry.
Wesley Parish
On 7/02/2012, at 9:04 PM, Paul Bennett wrote:
> This is off topic, I suppose, but if anyone knows of a good,
> Pimsleur-like audio course for Amharic, I'd appreciate a pointer to
> where it can be purchased or obtained.
>
> Also, any information whatsoever about the languages of the Oro
> River region would be highly useful.
>
> I may end up undertaking some charity work in that region this
> fall, and I want to be able to at least try to fend for myself,
> linguistically. I've pretty much got lessons that include "Stop, or
> I'll shoot" and "Don't shoot" (et sim), but they appear to be very
> rudimentary phrasebook-style audio clips compared to a Pimsleur-
> like course where one learns real communication skills.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> --
> Paul
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: NATLANG: Amharic, and Ethiopian local languages
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 2:55 am ((PST))
On 7 Feb 2012, at 10:34, Wesley Parish <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is a Colloquial Amharic available:
> http://www.amazon.com/Colloquial-Amharic-David-Appleyard/dp/0415100054
> http://books.google.co.nz/books/about/Colloquial_Amharic.html?id=EzQ2s-bLRiIC&redir_esc=y
> http://www.routledge.com/books/details/9780415100038/
>
> It includes an audio CD as standard. I don't know whether or not it is still
> in print as of today,
It is: ISBN: 9781740596459
Also found: 9781740596459 (lonely planet phrasebook), 9788171440528
(dictionary) and a few others.
This message is brought to you by www.halebookshop.co.uk (my employer)
> but The Colloquial [Language] series is a very good and useful series IMO.
> They start from the rudimentary " Hi, my name is such-and-such, and you name
> is?" to discussing various topics of interest. Recommended.
>
> I have no knowledge of the Oro River languages, sorry.
>
> Wesley Parish
>
> On 7/02/2012, at 9:04 PM, Paul Bennett wrote:
>
>> This is off topic, I suppose, but if anyone knows of a good, Pimsleur-like
>> audio course for Amharic, I'd appreciate a pointer to where it can be
>> purchased or obtained.
>>
>> Also, any information whatsoever about the languages of the Oro River region
>> would be highly useful.
>>
>> I may end up undertaking some charity work in that region this fall, and I
>> want to be able to at least try to fend for myself, linguistically. I've
>> pretty much got lessons that include "Stop, or I'll shoot" and "Don't shoot"
>> (et sim), but they appear to be very rudimentary phrasebook-style audio
>> clips compared to a Pimsleur-like course where one learns real communication
>> skills.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Paul
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
4c. Re: NATLANG: Amharic, and Ethiopian local languages
Posted by: "Paul Bennett" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 3:39 am ((PST))
On Tue, 07 Feb 2012 03:04:19 -0500, Paul Bennett
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Also, any information whatsoever about the languages of the Oro River
> region would be highly useful.
That's the Omo River region, not the Oro River region. Sorry for any
confusion.
--
Paul
Messages in this topic (4)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. New Blog Post: Moten Part VI: Negation and Polar Questions
Posted by: "Christophe Grandsire-Koevoets" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 7, 2012 4:13 am ((PST))
Hi everyone!
I've just updated my blog with a new post about Moten grammar. This time, I
tackle two syntactic rather than morphological topics (well, at least in
Moten they are handled by syntax :) ): negation and polar questions.
The post itself is available at the following link:
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/2012/02/moten-part-vi-negation-and-polar.html(and
the list of posts devoted to Moten is available on this static page:
http://christophoronomicon.blogspot.com/p/moten-language.html).
Writing this post made me realise that Moten is even weirder than I
originally thought (it even prompted me to write on Twitter 10 days ago
that it made me discover new "levels of weird" in the language). Although
I'd rather you read the post itself to get the full info, I can at least
mention here why it makes me think that way :) .
Basically, Moten has two productive ways of forming negations: the
"alternative" particle _mu_, and the "logical negation" particle _us_.
_Mu_ is used like "not" in "not blue", i.e. to indicate an alternative
(semantically speaking, "not blue" is similar to "other than blue"). So for
instance _mu sezgo_ means "not fast", as in "other than fast" (i.e. it
doesn't automatically mean "slow"). The peculiar part about _mu_ is that
its "other than" meaning extends even when it's used on the verb, and has a
slightly different meaning depending on whether it's used on the verb
itself or its auxiliary (as you might remember, nearly all conjugations in
Moten are periphrastic). This means that translating it simply as "not" is
not always the right thing to do! I'll let you check the blog post itself
for examples.
I call _us_ the "logical negation", because its basically falsifies the
statement it's in. It's equivalent to starting a sentence with "it's false
that...". Its main peculiarity is that its scope isn't the word it
completes, or even the clause it's in. Its scope is a full *statement*,
i.e. an independent clause, possibly accompanied with subclauses (in
general, it's equal to say that its scope is a full sentence, except when
two independent clauses are coordinated or juxtaposed). This means, for
instance, that if _us_ is in a subclause, it doesn't negate that subclause
itself. Rather, it negates the *statement* the subclause is part of (and is
thus normally translated by negating the main clause, even though it's
nowhere near it!). See the post for more details.
Maybe the weirdest part is the fact that _mu_ is actually the more commonly
used negation, and _us_ the lesser used one. In particular, _us_ cannot be
used in questions and in imperative sentences, and due to its weird scope
rules it cannot be used to negate subclauses either.
Actually no, the really weirdest part of it all is the behaviour of
multiple negations. You'll really need to read the post I made though, as
there is just too much to say about this subject for this post. But to sum
it up: multiple _mu_ particles usually ignore each other unless they don't
(you *really* need to read the post to get it!), _mu_ and _us_ in the same
clause often cancel each other, forming a strengthened affirmation, but not
always, and multiple _us_ particles are equivalent to having a single _us_
in the sentence, i.e. they neither cancel nor strengthen each other. And
that's without including the negative indefinite pronouns in the mix! (I do
explain how they interact with the other negations in the post)
Compared to all that craziness, describing how to form yes-no questions
(through a verb-not-verb construction) and how to answer them is a walk in
the park, and a nice way to conclude the post.
So I hope I've woken your appetite, and that you will head to my blog to
read this new post about Moten grammar :) . As usual, comments are more
than welcome. I'm especially interested to know about your conlangs'
negation schemes, and I am curious to know whether the weird scoping rules
of _us_ have an ANADEW or ACADEW.
Cheers,
--
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
