There are 20 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Daniel Bowman
1.2. Re: opossum - opossa
From: J. Jocordy
1.3. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Alex Fink
1.4. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Garth Wallace
1.5. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Garth Wallace
1.6. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Matthew Turnbull
1.7. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Ian Spolarich
1.8. Orthographic and other constraints (was Re: opossum - opossa)
From: Eric Christopherson
1.9. Re: opossum - opossa
From: A. da Mek
1.10. Re: opossum - opossa
From: MorphemeAddict
1.11. Re: Orthographic and other constraints (was Re: opossum - opossa)
From: Eugene Oh
1.12. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Peter Cyrus
1.13. Re: Orthographic and other constraints (was Re: opossum - opossa)
From: Sam Stutter
1.14. Re: opossum - opossa
From: BPJ
1.15. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Padraic Brown
1.16. Re: opossum - opossa
From: Krista Casada
2a. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
From: Armin Buch
2b. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
From: Michael Everson
2c. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
From: Nikolay Ivankov
2d. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
From: Nikolay Ivankov
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:41 pm ((PST))
Yes, but how many of us have actually used these in speech, unknowingly?
I have definitely used "arrove", thankfully my wife is used to my
linguistic oddities. I've not yet said "glid" though I've come close.
On a hypocritical note, I might offer a class at my company on "how to use
apostrophe's correctly" before I go completely insane at the number of
misuses I see on a daily basis.
2012/2/23 Padraic Brown <[email protected]>
> --- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected] <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
> > > I arrive. I arrove. I have arriven.
> > > The swan glides. The swan glid. The swan
> > > has glided? Glidded?
> >
> > Wouldn't this be:
> >
> > The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has glidden.
>
> That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with Adam on arrive,
> arrove, arrivven.
>
> Padraic
>
> > --Ph. D.
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "J. Jocordy" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:42 pm ((PST))
A prog rock band named Gong has an excellent song called "I Never Glid Before."
Therefore, it must be glid. Gong is always right!
(OT: Speaking of prog rock, I just discovered this band called Magma. They made
a conlang for their lyrics called Kobaïan. Apparently Kobaïan is "based on
elements of Slavic-Germanic languages and the scat-yodelling vocal style
of Leon Thomas," which is about the best description of a conlang I've ever
heard.)
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 8:22 PM, Padraic Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> --- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected] <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > > Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
> > > I arrive. I arrove. I have arriven.
> > > The swan glides. The swan glid. The swan
> > > has glided? Glidded?
> >
> > Wouldn't this be:
> >
> > The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has glidden.
>
> That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with Adam on arrive,
> arrove, arrivven.
>
> Padraic
>
> > --Ph. D.
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.3. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 6:48 pm ((PST))
On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:22:43 -0800, Padraic Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>--- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
>> > I arrive. I arrove. I have arriven.
>> > The swan glides. The swan glid. The swan
>> > has glided? Glidded?
>>
>> Wouldn't this be:
>>
>> The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has glidden.
>
>That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with Adam on arrive,
>arrove, arrivven.
The spelling is indisputably "arriven" with one V though! Just like "driven
striven shriven ?swiven". English spelling has a strong constraint against
*vv (just like against final *-v, and in the pre-Renaissance stratum against
*uv: thus we can't but spell "love" and "cove" and "move" as eye-rhymes. If
you ask me, the regular spelling of the word meaning 'makeshift knife' /SIv/
is "shive").
As for "glide", I would totally never have realised "glid" was not the
standard past / ppt if it hadn't been mentioned. Far too prone to
contamination with "slide".
But of course the whole strong verb system has shattered to smithereens in
modern English. Where we once had seven cohesive classes, now we have
umpty-ump sui generis classes as in thìs former class 3 verb the past has
overwritten the participle, but in thàt one the participle has overwritten
the present, und so weiter. It's all well and good to strengthen the weak,
but while we're at it let's put the discipline back in the strongs as well!
I ran, I have run, but I *rin*, etc. Who's with me?
Alex
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.4. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 7:34 pm ((PST))
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM, J. Jocordy <[email protected]> wrote:
> A prog rock band named Gong has an excellent song called "I Never Glid
> Before."
> Therefore, it must be glid. Gong is always right!
>
> (OT: Speaking of prog rock, I just discovered this band called Magma. They
> made
> a conlang for their lyrics called Kobaïan. Apparently Kobaïan is "based on
> elements of Slavic-Germanic languages and the scat-yodelling vocal style
> of Leon Thomas," which is about the best description of a conlang I've ever
> heard.)
I love Magma, but calling Kobaian a conlang may be pushing it. There's
no syntax, really. Supposedly the lyrics tell a story, but it's hard
to believe the repetitive chanting conveys any sort of narrative.
It does have some of the coolest diacritics, though.
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.5. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Garth Wallace" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 7:35 pm ((PST))
On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Daniel Bowman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, but how many of us have actually used these in speech, unknowingly?
>
> I have definitely used "arrove", thankfully my wife is used to my
> linguistic oddities. I've not yet said "glid" though I've come close.
>
> On a hypocritical note, I might offer a class at my company on "how to use
> apostrophe's correctly" before I go completely insane at the number of
> misuses I see on a daily basis.
Just pin up this poster in the breakroom:
http://www.angryflower.com/aposter.html
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.6. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Matthew Turnbull" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 8:38 pm ((PST))
Glid isn't standard english...I never knew... Add another non-standard
idolectal feature to my list
On 2/23/12, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM, J. Jocordy <[email protected]> wrote:
>> A prog rock band named Gong has an excellent song called "I Never Glid
>> Before."
>> Therefore, it must be glid. Gong is always right!
>>
>> (OT: Speaking of prog rock, I just discovered this band called Magma. They
>> made
>> a conlang for their lyrics called KobaÄan. Apparently KobaÄan is "based on
>> elements of Slavic-Germanic languages and the scat-yodelling vocal style
>> of Leon Thomas," which is about the best description of a conlang I've
>> ever
>> heard.)
>
> I love Magma, but calling Kobaian a conlang may be pushing it. There's
> no syntax, really. Supposedly the lyrics tell a story, but it's hard
> to believe the repetitive chanting conveys any sort of narrative.
>
> It does have some of the coolest diacritics, though.
>
--
Sent from my mobile device
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.7. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Ian Spolarich" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 9:30 pm ((PST))
I like "rin.." It makes me think of someone saying "He dun' rin all da way
home!"
I tend to avoid the use of unknown past forms of verbs, in general. But I
would definitely appreciate a more regular system of tense changes in
English. In one of my conlangs that had vowel harmony, the change in tense
was shown through a variation in vowels, e.g., _u tiri_ "I have" becomes _u
turu_ "I had." While this is impossible in English, it's cool.
You could have a pattern like so:
(prs.) , ablaut and/or -n , -/ot/
Write, written, wrote
Run, ran, ront?
Glide, gliden, glodt/glot?
Have, haden, hodt
Wear, wearn, wornt (this is my favorite)
Make, maen, mokt
usw.
Today I had to try saying "Cape Cod" about ten times before I got it right,
the first few went something like "Cape of God" and "Kate Cot" and "Make
Pod", oh dear...
-Ian
On 23 February 2012 22:37, Matthew Turnbull <[email protected]> wrote:
> Glid isn't standard english...I never knew... Add another non-standard
> idolectal feature to my list
>
> On 2/23/12, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM, J. Jocordy <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> A prog rock band named Gong has an excellent song called "I Never Glid
> >> Before."
> >> Therefore, it must be glid. Gong is always right!
> >>
> >> (OT: Speaking of prog rock, I just discovered this band called Magma.
> They
> >> made
> >> a conlang for their lyrics called KobaÄan. Apparently KobaÄan is "based
> on
> >> elements of Slavic-Germanic languages and the scat-yodelling vocal style
> >> of Leon Thomas," which is about the best description of a conlang I've
> >> ever
> >> heard.)
> >
> > I love Magma, but calling Kobaian a conlang may be pushing it. There's
> > no syntax, really. Supposedly the lyrics tell a story, but it's hard
> > to believe the repetitive chanting conveys any sort of narrative.
> >
> > It does have some of the coolest diacritics, though.
> >
>
> --
> Sent from my mobile device
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.8. Orthographic and other constraints (was Re: opossum - opossa)
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 10:34 pm ((PST))
On Feb 23, 2012, at 8:48 PM, Alex Fink wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:22:43 -0800, Padraic Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> --- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected] <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
>>>> I arrive. I arrove. I have arriven.
>>>> The swan glides. The swan glid. The swan
>>>> has glided? Glidded?
>>>
>>> Wouldn't this be:
>>>
>>> The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has glidden.
>>
>> That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with Adam on arrive,
>> arrove, arrivven.
>
> The spelling is indisputably "arriven" with one V though! Just like "driven
> striven shriven ?swiven". English spelling has a strong constraint against
> *vv
Yeah. Words like _flivver_ and _savvy_ irk me.
> (just like against final *-v, and in the pre-Renaissance stratum against
> *uv: thus we can't but spell "love" and "cove" and "move" as eye-rhymes.
Oh, good point. That reminds me, but on the subject of phonetics rather than
spelling: I was watching a programming screencast the other day and the guy
talking kept pronouncing _native_ with a final [f]. I started wondering if
maybe that's partly due to the lack of a final [v] in pre-French English
words... but you'd think the French-derived words would have swamped that rule
by now.
I've also been wondering lately if English has a slight dispreference for words
ending in a single _g_, based on the existence of words like _Gregg_ with no
etymological basis for the doubling. But there *are* plenty of words ending in
single _g_...
Finally, it's pretty obvious English (and some other Germanic languages)
disprefers final bare _k_ (and to a lesser extent, especially in the last few
centuries, _c_). I used to play a MUD game that featured a valuable item called
a "gold chunck"; for a long time I thought the spelling _chunck_ was some sort
of joke, but lately I've been wondering if the game's author was merely
extending the final _ck_ rule to positions after another consonant.
[Perhaps a gold chunck is really not a *chunk* at all, but a simulacrum of one
-- sort of like how in the US you can legally label chicken wing-like things
(but boneless and not necessarily made of wing meat) as _wyngz_ or _wiingz_, or
more egregiously, _chick'n_ for a chicken-flavored vegetarian product. I've
seen all of those spellings.
(And what's with the marketing spelling of _pak_ instead of _pack_?)
> If
> you ask me, the regular spelling of the word meaning 'makeshift knife' /SIv/
> is "shive").
I can't go along with that one -- it seems obvious that the vowel there would
be /ai/; perhaps because it only has one syllable? But I can't think of a
better rendering than those two spellings.
>
> As for "glide", I would totally never have realised "glid" was not the
> standard past / ppt if it hadn't been mentioned. Far too prone to
> contamination with "slide".
I didn't realize it either.
I know sometimes if I'm not quite sure of a past tense word, I will substitute
the past progressive for it. But that isn't always semantically correct.
>
> But of course the whole strong verb system has shattered to smithereens in
> modern English. Where we once had seven cohesive classes, now we have
> umpty-ump sui generis classes as in thìs former class 3 verb the past has
> overwritten the participle, but in thàt one the participle has overwritten
> the present, und so weiter. It's all well and good to strengthen the weak,
> but while we're at it let's put the discipline back in the strongs as well!
> I ran, I have run, but I *rin*, etc. Who's with me?
>
> Alex
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.9. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "A. da Mek" [email protected]
Date: Thu Feb 23, 2012 11:19 pm ((PST))
> arrive, arrove, arrivven.
or with ligatures
arrive, arrove, arriwen
rise, rose, rißen
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.10. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:12 am ((PST))
There is already a perfectly regular past tense in English: did + verb. It
sounds clunky if used all the time, but it's regular. It's also emphatic,
so something else to be aware of. (Of course, "did" itself is not regular,
but it's the same form in all numbers and persons, so it doesn't matter.)
stevo
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Ian Spolarich <[email protected]>wrote:
> I like "rin.." It makes me think of someone saying "He dun' rin all da way
> home!"
>
> I tend to avoid the use of unknown past forms of verbs, in general. But I
> would definitely appreciate a more regular system of tense changes in
> English. In one of my conlangs that had vowel harmony, the change in tense
> was shown through a variation in vowels, e.g., _u tiri_ "I have" becomes _u
> turu_ "I had." While this is impossible in English, it's cool.
>
> You could have a pattern like so:
> (prs.) , ablaut and/or -n , -/ot/
> Write, written, wrote
> Run, ran, ront?
> Glide, gliden, glodt/glot?
> Have, haden, hodt
> Wear, wearn, wornt (this is my favorite)
> Make, maen, mokt
> usw.
>
> Today I had to try saying "Cape Cod" about ten times before I got it right,
> the first few went something like "Cape of God" and "Kate Cot" and "Make
> Pod", oh dear...
>
> -Ian
>
> On 23 February 2012 22:37, Matthew Turnbull <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Glid isn't standard english...I never knew... Add another non-standard
> > idolectal feature to my list
> >
> > On 2/23/12, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM, J. Jocordy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >> A prog rock band named Gong has an excellent song called "I Never Glid
> > >> Before."
> > >> Therefore, it must be glid. Gong is always right!
> > >>
> > >> (OT: Speaking of prog rock, I just discovered this band called Magma.
> > They
> > >> made
> > >> a conlang for their lyrics called KobaÄan. Apparently KobaÄan is
> "based
> > on
> > >> elements of Slavic-Germanic languages and the scat-yodelling vocal
> style
> > >> of Leon Thomas," which is about the best description of a conlang I've
> > >> ever
> > >> heard.)
> > >
> > > I love Magma, but calling Kobaian a conlang may be pushing it. There's
> > > no syntax, really. Supposedly the lyrics tell a story, but it's hard
> > > to believe the repetitive chanting conveys any sort of narrative.
> > >
> > > It does have some of the coolest diacritics, though.
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from my mobile device
> >
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.11. Re: Orthographic and other constraints (was Re: opossum - opossa)
Posted by: "Eugene Oh" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:51 am ((PST))
In Britain we have all sorts of word-final single v's - chav, spiv etc
Eugene
Sent from my iPhone
On 24 Feb 2012, at 06:34, Eric Christopherson <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Feb 23, 2012, at 8:48 PM, Alex Fink wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:22:43 -0800, Padraic Brown <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> --- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
>>>>> I arrive. I arrove. I have arriven.
>>>>> The swan glides. The swan glid. The swan
>>>>> has glided? Glidded?
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't this be:
>>>>
>>>> The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has glidden.
>>>
>>> That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with Adam on arrive,
>>> arrove, arrivven.
>>
>> The spelling is indisputably "arriven" with one V though! Just like "driven
>> striven shriven ?swiven". English spelling has a strong constraint against
>> *vv
>
> Yeah. Words like _flivver_ and _savvy_ irk me.
>
>> (just like against final *-v, and in the pre-Renaissance stratum against
>> *uv: thus we can't but spell "love" and "cove" and "move" as eye-rhymes.
>
> Oh, good point. That reminds me, but on the subject of phonetics rather than
> spelling: I was watching a programming screencast the other day and the guy
> talking kept pronouncing _native_ with a final [f]. I started wondering if
> maybe that's partly due to the lack of a final [v] in pre-French English
> words... but you'd think the French-derived words would have swamped that
> rule by now.
>
> I've also been wondering lately if English has a slight dispreference for
> words ending in a single _g_, based on the existence of words like _Gregg_
> with no etymological basis for the doubling. But there *are* plenty of words
> ending in single _g_...
>
> Finally, it's pretty obvious English (and some other Germanic languages)
> disprefers final bare _k_ (and to a lesser extent, especially in the last few
> centuries, _c_). I used to play a MUD game that featured a valuable item
> called a "gold chunck"; for a long time I thought the spelling _chunck_ was
> some sort of joke, but lately I've been wondering if the game's author was
> merely extending the final _ck_ rule to positions after another consonant.
>
> [Perhaps a gold chunck is really not a *chunk* at all, but a simulacrum of
> one -- sort of like how in the US you can legally label chicken wing-like
> things (but boneless and not necessarily made of wing meat) as _wyngz_ or
> _wiingz_, or more egregiously, _chick'n_ for a chicken-flavored vegetarian
> product. I've seen all of those spellings.
>
> (And what's with the marketing spelling of _pak_ instead of _pack_?)
>
>> If
>> you ask me, the regular spelling of the word meaning 'makeshift knife' /SIv/
>> is "shive").
>
> I can't go along with that one -- it seems obvious that the vowel there would
> be /ai/; perhaps because it only has one syllable? But I can't think of a
> better rendering than those two spellings.
>
>>
>> As for "glide", I would totally never have realised "glid" was not the
>> standard past / ppt if it hadn't been mentioned. Far too prone to
>> contamination with "slide".
>
> I didn't realize it either.
>
> I know sometimes if I'm not quite sure of a past tense word, I will
> substitute the past progressive for it. But that isn't always semantically
> correct.
>
>>
>> But of course the whole strong verb system has shattered to smithereens in
>> modern English. Where we once had seven cohesive classes, now we have
>> umpty-ump sui generis classes as in th¨¬s former class 3 verb the past has
>> overwritten the participle, but in th¨¤t one the participle has overwritten
>> the present, und so weiter. It's all well and good to strengthen the weak,
>> but while we're at it let's put the discipline back in the strongs as well!
>> I ran, I have run, but I *rin*, etc. Who's with me?
>>
>> Alex
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.12. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Peter Cyrus" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 1:57 am ((PST))
We can imagine a completely periphrastic variety of English, with
- past in "did"
- perfect in "have"
- progressive in "are"
- future in "will"
- conditional in "would"
- a few others, like a verbal noun in "to"
all followed by the bare verb, and no other verb forms.
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:11 AM, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is already a perfectly regular past tense in English: did + verb. It
> sounds clunky if used all the time, but it's regular. It's also emphatic,
> so something else to be aware of. (Of course, "did" itself is not regular,
> but it's the same form in all numbers and persons, so it doesn't matter.)
>
> stevo
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Ian Spolarich <[email protected]
> >wrote:
>
> > I like "rin.." It makes me think of someone saying "He dun' rin all da
> way
> > home!"
> >
> > I tend to avoid the use of unknown past forms of verbs, in general. But I
> > would definitely appreciate a more regular system of tense changes in
> > English. In one of my conlangs that had vowel harmony, the change in
> tense
> > was shown through a variation in vowels, e.g., _u tiri_ "I have" becomes
> _u
> > turu_ "I had." While this is impossible in English, it's cool.
> >
> > You could have a pattern like so:
> > (prs.) , ablaut and/or -n , -/ot/
> > Write, written, wrote
> > Run, ran, ront?
> > Glide, gliden, glodt/glot?
> > Have, haden, hodt
> > Wear, wearn, wornt (this is my favorite)
> > Make, maen, mokt
> > usw.
> >
> > Today I had to try saying "Cape Cod" about ten times before I got it
> right,
> > the first few went something like "Cape of God" and "Kate Cot" and "Make
> > Pod", oh dear...
> >
> > -Ian
> >
> > On 23 February 2012 22:37, Matthew Turnbull <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Glid isn't standard english...I never knew... Add another non-standard
> > > idolectal feature to my list
> > >
> > > On 2/23/12, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 6:42 PM, J. Jocordy <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >> A prog rock band named Gong has an excellent song called "I Never
> Glid
> > > >> Before."
> > > >> Therefore, it must be glid. Gong is always right!
> > > >>
> > > >> (OT: Speaking of prog rock, I just discovered this band called
> Magma.
> > > They
> > > >> made
> > > >> a conlang for their lyrics called KobaÄan. Apparently KobaÄan is
> > "based
> > > on
> > > >> elements of Slavic-Germanic languages and the scat-yodelling vocal
> > style
> > > >> of Leon Thomas," which is about the best description of a conlang
> I've
> > > >> ever
> > > >> heard.)
> > > >
> > > > I love Magma, but calling Kobaian a conlang may be pushing it.
> There's
> > > > no syntax, really. Supposedly the lyrics tell a story, but it's hard
> > > > to believe the repetitive chanting conveys any sort of narrative.
> > > >
> > > > It does have some of the coolest diacritics, though.
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sent from my mobile device
> > >
> >
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.13. Re: Orthographic and other constraints (was Re: opossum - opossa)
Posted by: "Sam Stutter" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 2:28 am ((PST))
Both AFAIK, from Romani gypsy (although I guess the jury is still out):
chav = chavi = boy
spiv = sparrow
Sam Stutter
[email protected]
"No e na il cu barri"
On 24 Feb 2012, at 09:51, Eugene Oh <[email protected]> wrote:
> In Britain we have all sorts of word-final single v's - chav, spiv etc
>
> Eugene
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 24 Feb 2012, at 06:34, Eric Christopherson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Feb 23, 2012, at 8:48 PM, Alex Fink wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2012 18:22:43 -0800, Padraic Brown <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> --- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected] <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
>>>>>> I arrive. I arrove. I have arriven.
>>>>>> The swan glides. The swan glid. The swan
>>>>>> has glided? Glidded?
>>>>>
>>>>> Wouldn't this be:
>>>>>
>>>>> The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has glidden.
>>>>
>>>> That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with Adam on arrive,
>>>> arrove, arrivven.
>>>
>>> The spelling is indisputably "arriven" with one V though! Just like "driven
>>> striven shriven ?swiven". English spelling has a strong constraint against
>>> *vv
>>
>> Yeah. Words like _flivver_ and _savvy_ irk me.
>>
>>> (just like against final *-v, and in the pre-Renaissance stratum against
>>> *uv: thus we can't but spell "love" and "cove" and "move" as eye-rhymes.
>>
>> Oh, good point. That reminds me, but on the subject of phonetics rather than
>> spelling: I was watching a programming screencast the other day and the guy
>> talking kept pronouncing _native_ with a final [f]. I started wondering if
>> maybe that's partly due to the lack of a final [v] in pre-French English
>> words... but you'd think the French-derived words would have swamped that
>> rule by now.
>>
>> I've also been wondering lately if English has a slight dispreference for
>> words ending in a single _g_, based on the existence of words like _Gregg_
>> with no etymological basis for the doubling. But there *are* plenty of words
>> ending in single _g_...
>>
>> Finally, it's pretty obvious English (and some other Germanic languages)
>> disprefers final bare _k_ (and to a lesser extent, especially in the last
>> few centuries, _c_). I used to play a MUD game that featured a valuable item
>> called a "gold chunck"; for a long time I thought the spelling _chunck_ was
>> some sort of joke, but lately I've been wondering if the game's author was
>> merely extending the final _ck_ rule to positions after another consonant.
>>
>> [Perhaps a gold chunck is really not a *chunk* at all, but a simulacrum of
>> one -- sort of like how in the US you can legally label chicken wing-like
>> things (but boneless and not necessarily made of wing meat) as _wyngz_ or
>> _wiingz_, or more egregiously, _chick'n_ for a chicken-flavored vegetarian
>> product. I've seen all of those spellings.
>>
>> (And what's with the marketing spelling of _pak_ instead of _pack_?)
>>
>>> If
>>> you ask me, the regular spelling of the word meaning 'makeshift knife' /SIv/
>>> is "shive").
>>
>> I can't go along with that one -- it seems obvious that the vowel there
>> would be /ai/; perhaps because it only has one syllable? But I can't think
>> of a better rendering than those two spellings.
>>
>>>
>>> As for "glide", I would totally never have realised "glid" was not the
>>> standard past / ppt if it hadn't been mentioned. Far too prone to
>>> contamination with "slide".
>>
>> I didn't realize it either.
>>
>> I know sometimes if I'm not quite sure of a past tense word, I will
>> substitute the past progressive for it. But that isn't always semantically
>> correct.
>>
>>>
>>> But of course the whole strong verb system has shattered to smithereens in
>>> modern English. Where we once had seven cohesive classes, now we have
>>> umpty-ump sui generis classes as in thìs former class 3 verb the past has
>>> overwritten the participle, but in thàt one the participle has overwritten
>>> the present, und so weiter. It's all well and good to strengthen the weak,
>>> but while we're at it let's put the discipline back in the strongs as well!
>>> I ran, I have run, but I *rin*, etc. Who's with me?
>>>
>>> Alex
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.14. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "BPJ" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:04 am ((PST))
On 2012-02-24 03:48, Alex Fink wrote:
> The spelling is indisputably "arriven" with one V though! Just like "driven
> striven shriven ?swiven". English spelling has a strong constraint against
> *vv (just like against final *-v, and in the pre-Renaissance stratum against
> *uv: thus we can't but spell "love" and "cove" and "move" as eye-rhymes. If
> you ask me, the regular spelling of the word meaning 'makeshift knife'/SIv/
> is "shive").
That's because before the Enlightenment _v/u_ and
_i/j_ weren't separate letters but context-dependent
variants, each with both a vocalic and a consonantal
value, so they had to pad _u_ /v/ with a silent _e_
to show that it should have its consonantal value
-- or thought they had to, since in practice they
used _w_ in all final vowel digraphs: since _low_
was so spelled _lou_ could have been used instead of
_loue_, but they didn't.
The constraint against _vv_ is because _w_ could be
printed as _vv_ -- especially common VVITH CAPITALS.
The name "double u" for _w_ is a holdover of all this,
as is the substitution of _ov(e)_ for _**uv_.
There are holdovers of this in other languages too.
In the spelling _huevo_ for Spanish /webo/ the _h_
was a diacritic to show that it was not /bebo/
(or */Bebo/, since initial */B/ and */b/ hadn't
merged yet back then), and in Swedish /v/ was
spelled _fv_ between vowels and _f_ at the end
of a word until 1908. In medieval Swedish /hu:s/
was usually spelled _hws_, with double u.
/bpj
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.15. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 3:48 am ((PST))
--- On Thu, 2/23/12, Daniel Bowman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, but how many of us have actually used these in speech, unknowingly?
Several times. One time I recall was in an elementary Latin class, doing
translation exercises (Ecce Romani). Whatever the Latin word was, I
translated it as "clomb" (as in climb). Got a rather memorable look from
my professor!
> I have definitely used "arrove", thankfully my wife is used
> to my
> linguistic oddities. I've not yet said "glid" though
> I've come close.
I regularly use "boughten", leastways as an adjective. Boughten bread ain't
as good as home made, you see.
> On a hypocritical note, I might offer a class at my company
> on "how to use
> apostrophe's correctly" before I go completely insane at the
> number of misuses I see on a daily basis.
I think you mean "a class'". 50% a'int bad!
Padraic
> 2012/2/23 Padraic Brown <[email protected]>
>
> > --- On Thu, 2/23/12, [email protected]
> <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > Yeah, I realized I had made a mistake.
> > > > I arrive. I arrove. I have
> arriven.
> > > > The swan glides. The swan glid.
> The swan
> > > > has glided? Glidded?
> > >
> > > Wouldn't this be:
> > >
> > > The swan glides. The swan glode. The swan has
> glidden.
> >
> > That's the one I use (internal ideolect). Agree with
> Adam on arrive,
> > arrove, arrivven.
> >
> > Padraic
> >
> > > --Ph. D.
> >
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
1.16. Re: opossum - opossa
Posted by: "Krista Casada" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 6:41 am ((PST))
Oh, nice!
Krista C.
----- Original Message -----
From: "A. da Mek" <[email protected]>
Date: Friday, February 24, 2012 1:18 am
Subject: Re: opossum - opossa
To: [email protected]
> > arrive, arrove, arrivven.
>
> or with ligatures
> arrive, arrove, arriwen
> rise, rose, rißen
>
Messages in this topic (33)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
Posted by: "Armin Buch" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 6:07 am ((PST))
Many thanks for the great input! I might come back with more specific
questions. For now, I'm off to reading.
Armin
Messages in this topic (19)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
Posted by: "Michael Everson" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:21 am ((PST))
On 23 Feb 2012, at 14:19, BPJ wrote:
> On 2012-02-23 21:31, Michael Everson wrote:
>> But the Ardalambion crowd are interested in Neo-Quenya, which is a very
>> different thing from the study of what Tolkien actually did. That scholarly
>> work is ongoing; seehttp://www.eldalamberon.com/
>
> But which might be an interesting topic in its own right to an academic
> studying conlangs as a phenomenon.
Perhaps, but it's still not Tolkien's work.
> BTW one can be interested in Tolkien's languages from both a paleo- and a
> neo- angle. And how come reviving a conlang would be bad, while reviving a
> natlang would be good?
You can't "revive" Quenya. Or Sindarin. Or Goldogrin. Or Khuzdul. Or the Black
Speech. You can make up stuff to fill in the gaps, but the result is never
"authentic", in Tolkien's terms. But it's making up stuff. And may contradict
the actual etymological data (inconsistent as that may be).
I suppose I have no great objection to new works being written in these
languages, so long as anything Neo- is labelled as Neo-.
Personally, though, I think I would not publish an Alice in Neo-Quenya, because
of the honour and respect I hold for Tolkien, whose work, which I read at a
formative time in my life, helped to make me the person I am today. To me, a
Neo-Quenya Alice would not be authentic.
> That the two crowds don't go well together is because of personal chemistry
> issues rather than the two pursuits being antithetical. It's not like no one
> can do the other if anyone does the one.
I guess. Ursula Le Guin tells of being asked by various writers and aspiring
writers for permission to write stories set in her Ekumen. Her answer was "No,
go invent your own universe."
Another excellent resource for Tolkienian linguistics is Vinyar Tengwar:
http://www.elvish.org
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Messages in this topic (19)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
Posted by: "Nikolay Ivankov" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:38 am ((PST))
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Michael Everson <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 23 Feb 2012, at 14:19, BPJ wrote:
>
> I guess. Ursula Le Guin tells of being asked by various writers and
> aspiring writers for permission to write stories set in her Ekumen. Her
> answer was "No, go invent your own universe."
>
Probably, her books were the main why reason I ended up here.
Messages in this topic (19)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: Linguistic literature on conlangs
Posted by: "Nikolay Ivankov" [email protected]
Date: Fri Feb 24, 2012 7:39 am ((PST))
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:38 PM, Nikolay Ivankov <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:21 PM, Michael Everson <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> On 23 Feb 2012, at 14:19, BPJ wrote:
>>
>> I guess. Ursula Le Guin tells of being asked by various writers and
>> aspiring writers for permission to write stories set in her Ekumen. Her
>> answer was "No, go invent your own universe."
>>
>
> Probably, her books were the main reason I ended up here.
>
Probably, her books were the main reason I ended up here.
P.S. And sometimes I have to read what I've just written.
Messages in this topic (19)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
