There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Conlang music (was RE: Orthography congruous to pronunciation)
From: Alex Fink
1b. Re: Conlang music (was RE: Orthography congruous to pronunciation)
From: Andrej ©uc
1c. Re: Conlang music (was RE: Orthography congruous to pronunciation)
From: David McCann
2.1. On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
From: Douglas Koller
2.2. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
From: Leonardo Castro
2.3. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
From: Leonardo Castro
2.4. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
From: Leonardo Castro
2.5. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
From: Charles W Brickner
2.6. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
From: Logan Kearsley
3a. Is this a conlang?
From: taliesin the storyteller
3b. Re: Is this a conlang?
From: Cíat Ó Gáibhtheacháin
3c. Re: Is this a conlang?
From: Nikolay Ivankov
4a. Re: single words for concepts for which other languages paraphrase
From: Douglas Koller
5a. Re: to be cognate or not to be cognate
From: Leonardo Castro
5b. Re: to be cognate or not to be cognate
From: Charles W Brickner
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Conlang music (was RE: Orthography congruous to pronunciation)
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Wed Jan 23, 2013 11:50 pm ((PST))
On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 02:15:13 +0100, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]>
wrote:
>Thanks to everyone who replied. The playlist now has 15 songs with a short
>description of the conlang used in each of them. You can share it with
>people who might be interested:
>http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLL6Iy2E-Y52stsLyT9SQqT5gZfm891jNM. If
>you think of other songs that could be added to this list, please let me
>know.
Teonaht was already mentioned but not, apparently, the crucial fact that some
of it is on Youtube. One such is
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XZlF-D4Ay4
I don't know if there are others, but if you're sufficiently diligent to dig
through textcavation's uploads you may find something else there.
Oh, oh, Aren Wood has some Sandic stuff on Youtube too.
http://www.youtube.com/user/bornforwater
Alex
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Conlang music (was RE: Orthography congruous to pronunciation)
Posted by: "Andrej ©uc" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:57 am ((PST))
You can include another song by Yuki Kajiura, it's my personal favourite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MX605mM-f74 the video includes the lyrics
and translation in English (I'm not sure if the translation is an official
one or not but it fits, I guess).
Also, don't forget the two and a half conlang songs that were in the
Eurovision Song Contest:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDcpAc6Qm3Y (Belgium, 2003)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLVj4bqEe6I (The Nederlands, 2006, partially
also in English)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbbajVZ4uOo (Belgium, 2008)
I can also contribute something more personal. A few years ago I translated
ABBA's s"I Have a Dream" into my conlang Laefèvæšii, as it was called back
then: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REIx5_tEJWk I no longer use that
version of the language, it has changed quite a lot since then (and it's
now also called Ascended/Celestial Laefêvëši). Oh, and to avoid any
confusion, it's not me who sang the song, I'm absolutely terrible at
singing, so I found someone else to sing it for me. :)
Cheers,
Andrej
2013/1/24 Alex Fink <[email protected]>
> On Thu, 24 Jan 2013 02:15:13 +0100, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >Thanks to everyone who replied. The playlist now has 15 songs with a short
> >description of the conlang used in each of them. You can share it with
> >people who might be interested:
> >http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLL6Iy2E-Y52stsLyT9SQqT5gZfm891jNM.
> If
> >you think of other songs that could be added to this list, please let me
> >know.
>
> Teonaht was already mentioned but not, apparently, the crucial fact that
> some of it is on Youtube. One such is
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XZlF-D4Ay4
> I don't know if there are others, but if you're sufficiently diligent to
> dig through textcavation's uploads you may find something else there.
>
> Oh, oh, Aren Wood has some Sandic stuff on Youtube too.
> http://www.youtube.com/user/bornforwater
>
> Alex
>
--
The future is predetermined by the character of those who shape it.
Prihodnost vnaprej doloÄajo karakterji tistih, ki jo oblikujejo.
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Conlang music (was RE: Orthography congruous to pronunciation)
Posted by: "David McCann" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:06 am ((PST))
On Wed, 23 Jan 2013 22:31:44 -0500
Herman Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There's also a melody for my Jarda translation of Irina Rempt's
> "Starling Song" (Fü Margarêl)
> If anyone out there still has a Real Audio player after all these
> years, there's a recording of me singing the melody.
I'm proud to say that my Linux media player rendered it perfectly! I
can't quite decide whether it sounds Turkish or Japanese, but I'm no
musician; nice, though.
Messages in this topic (20)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:33 am ((PST))
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:09:04 -0800
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Loglan[g] VS Natlang
> To: [email protected]
> --- On Wed, 1/23/13, Leonardo Castro <[email protected]> wrote:
> Another possible subtle disadvantage of very regular ortographies is
> that child students can have more problem to distinguish letter from
> sound ( ("grapheme" from "phone/phoneme" in our jargon). But I don't
> know if the irregularity of English orthography solves this "problem"
> because I have the impression that some anglophone children also think
> they "a" _is_ /ei/. I wonder if they even notice that the "a" of
> "latter" is different from that of "later".
> ===============================================
> That's explained (or at least used to be...) as "long a" /ei/ vs. "short a"
> /æ/, just like "long i" /ai/ vs. "short i" /I/, "long o" /ow/ vs. "short"
> /a/, and others....
> ========================================
Since that's the justification of orthographically doubling consonants and
applying "silent e" (which is why "latter" *is* read and written differently
from "later"; "hope" vs. "hop"), yes, that explanation is still around in the
primary school classroom.
> Sometimes it's incredible what even adults don't perceive in its
> language. I have know people who's hardly convinced that pairs like
> "v" and "f" are articulated in the same way. Many Brazilians don't
> note that they pronounce the t's of "ta" and "ti" different from each
> other: in many dialects, they are /ta/ and /tSi/, and others can't be
> convinced that the "t" of "ti" is more similar to those of "ta, te,
> to, tu" in dialects of Nordeste (which is considered "wrong
> Portuguese" by some people). Finally, many are not aware that they
> reduce /o/ to /u/ and /e/ to /i/ in many words.
> Somebody has once told me that Americans usually don't perceive that
> they "flap" their "t" and "d" (although it's obvious for strangers
> whose /t/ and /d/ are not related to the alveolar flap).
Isn't that, like, the whole point of the notion of the phoneme and the
allophone? That certain English speakers perceive the "t" in "tar", "star",
"mortar" and "latter" as /t/ doesn't make them clueless wonders; that's just
the nature of English /t/ (whereas an Indian retroflex does not fall in /t/
territory and marks you clearly as not from round 'chere). Who writhes in angst
over differences in allophones in their only language except linguophiles?
Meanwhile, we can spot the difference between "sheet" and "shit" at fifty
paces, something that seems to mercurially elude many an L2 English speaker to
the constant amusement or horror of the natives.
> =====================================================
> I don't know what the solution would be.
And the problem is...?
>Ideally, kids should be taught at least a little about phonetics/phonemics and
>the IPA; it would certainly help learners of foreign langs. like French and
>German I think, and might even make monolingual >Engl. speakers a little more
>aware of what's going on in their own language.
I'm *all* for learning for learning's sake and generally having a more
self-aware, sophisticated, and savvy populace. But as linguophiles, must we
look utterly aghast if a non-linguophile eats their linguistic pie with the
salad fork?
Kou
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
2.2. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:53 am ((PST))
2013/1/24 Douglas Koller <[email protected]
>
>> Sometimes it's incredible what even adults don't perceive in its
>> language. I have know people who's hardly convinced that pairs like
>> "v" and "f" are articulated in the same way. Many Brazilians don't
>> note that they pronounce the t's of "ta" and "ti" different from each
>> other: in many dialects, they are /ta/ and /tSi/, and others can't be
>> convinced that the "t" of "ti" is more similar to those of "ta, te,
>> to, tu" in dialects of Nordeste (which is considered "wrong
>> Portuguese" by some people). Finally, many are not aware that they
>> reduce /o/ to /u/ and /e/ to /i/ in many words.
>
>> Somebody has once told me that Americans usually don't perceive that
>> they "flap" their "t" and "d" (although it's obvious for strangers
>> whose /t/ and /d/ are not related to the alveolar flap).
>
> Isn't that, like, the whole point of the notion of the phoneme and the
> allophone? That certain English speakers perceive the "t" in "tar", "star",
> "mortar" and "latter" as /t/ doesn't make them clueless wonders;
Of course not, because they are all the same phoneme. I was discussing
the child distinction between letter and sound and that's why I
pointed to the fact that even adults are unaware of many features of
their pronunciation.
However, I would expect people to clearly note dialectal differences,
but many times they only can see that the other person speaks "funny".
That's the case of some Brazilian dialects' palatization of "ti" (just
like Japanese) and the American flapping of intervocalic /t/ and /d/.
As British people usually don't flap them, I would expect that the
difference would be easily perceived.
Once, I asked Justin B. Rye if the /t/ flapping was common in England
because Elton John usually sings that way or if he only want to sound
more American. He answered that Elton John not only flapped the /t/
but also changed his name from "Reginald Kenneth Dwight" to a less
English-sounding name.
> that's just the nature of English /t/ (whereas an Indian retroflex does not
> fall in /t/ territory and marks you clearly as not from round 'chere). Who
> writhes in angst over differences in allophones in their only language except
> linguophiles? Meanwhile, we can spot the difference between "sheet" and
> "shit" at fifty paces, something that seems to mercurially elude many an L2
> English speaker to the constant amusement or horror of the natives.
Maybe I pay more attention to accents or I have better hearing than
most people, because I could easily note this kind of difference by
hearing foreign languages audios in classes while many students don't
(and I wasn't always a Linguistics enthusiast).
A possible explanation is that I always paied attention to the way
people speak and was very tolerant with different accents. I know 30
years old people in Brasilia who keeps thinking that some common
pronunciations from South or Northeast are simply "wrong".
Apparently, being self-centered llike this also affects the capacity
of perceiving foreign sounds. I have already witnessed situations like
this: the person notes that the pronunciation of "bit" is somewhat
different from "beat" but, instead of trying to mimic it, he just
comments "Note how these Americans speak funny!" and keeps speaking
both as /bit/ because he can't imagine nor accept that there are
vowels different from those he knows. "It's either 'i' or 'e', there's
no such a thing as 'between them'!"
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
2.3. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:53 am ((PST))
Before people start saying that I think I'm perfect, I add that I had
problems with gutural phonemes. The biggest surprise was when someone
told me that the pronunciation of my "c" in "ca" is not the same of
its pronunciation in "cu", and they are different phonemes in other
languages. Today, I'm still not sure about the difference. Maybe it's
velar in "ca" and uvular in "cu"...
Até mais!
Leonardo
2013/1/24 Leonardo Castro <[email protected]>:
> 2013/1/24 Douglas Koller <[email protected]
>>
>>> Sometimes it's incredible what even adults don't perceive in its
>>> language. I have know people who's hardly convinced that pairs like
>>> "v" and "f" are articulated in the same way. Many Brazilians don't
>>> note that they pronounce the t's of "ta" and "ti" different from each
>>> other: in many dialects, they are /ta/ and /tSi/, and others can't be
>>> convinced that the "t" of "ti" is more similar to those of "ta, te,
>>> to, tu" in dialects of Nordeste (which is considered "wrong
>>> Portuguese" by some people). Finally, many are not aware that they
>>> reduce /o/ to /u/ and /e/ to /i/ in many words.
>>
>>> Somebody has once told me that Americans usually don't perceive that
>>> they "flap" their "t" and "d" (although it's obvious for strangers
>>> whose /t/ and /d/ are not related to the alveolar flap).
>>
>> Isn't that, like, the whole point of the notion of the phoneme and the
>> allophone? That certain English speakers perceive the "t" in "tar", "star",
>> "mortar" and "latter" as /t/ doesn't make them clueless wonders;
>
> Of course not, because they are all the same phoneme. I was discussing
> the child distinction between letter and sound and that's why I
> pointed to the fact that even adults are unaware of many features of
> their pronunciation.
>
> However, I would expect people to clearly note dialectal differences,
> but many times they only can see that the other person speaks "funny".
> That's the case of some Brazilian dialects' palatization of "ti" (just
> like Japanese) and the American flapping of intervocalic /t/ and /d/.
> As British people usually don't flap them, I would expect that the
> difference would be easily perceived.
>
> Once, I asked Justin B. Rye if the /t/ flapping was common in England
> because Elton John usually sings that way or if he only want to sound
> more American. He answered that Elton John not only flapped the /t/
> but also changed his name from "Reginald Kenneth Dwight" to a less
> English-sounding name.
>
>> that's just the nature of English /t/ (whereas an Indian retroflex does not
>> fall in /t/ territory and marks you clearly as not from round 'chere). Who
>> writhes in angst over differences in allophones in their only language
>> except linguophiles? Meanwhile, we can spot the difference between "sheet"
>> and "shit" at fifty paces, something that seems to mercurially elude many an
>> L2 English speaker to the constant amusement or horror of the natives.
>
> Maybe I pay more attention to accents or I have better hearing than
> most people, because I could easily note this kind of difference by
> hearing foreign languages audios in classes while many students don't
> (and I wasn't always a Linguistics enthusiast).
>
> A possible explanation is that I always paied attention to the way
> people speak and was very tolerant with different accents. I know 30
> years old people in Brasilia who keeps thinking that some common
> pronunciations from South or Northeast are simply "wrong".
>
> Apparently, being self-centered llike this also affects the capacity
> of perceiving foreign sounds. I have already witnessed situations like
> this: the person notes that the pronunciation of "bit" is somewhat
> different from "beat" but, instead of trying to mimic it, he just
> comments "Note how these Americans speak funny!" and keeps speaking
> both as /bit/ because he can't imagine nor accept that there are
> vowels different from those he knows. "It's either 'i' or 'e', there's
> no such a thing as 'between them'!"
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
2.4. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:00 am ((PST))
BTW, a Brazilian Professor I know speaks French for at least 30 years,
is "Docteur D'Etat" by the University of Paris and admittedly can't
figure out the difference between /ÉÌ/ and /ÉÌ/ (both pronounced as
/ã/ by him). What's more interesting is that his French vocabulary is
huge, so that he can speaks practically anything in French but with an
obvious Brazilian accent (Minas Gerais accent, more precisely).
Até mais!
Leonardo
2013/1/24 Douglas Koller <[email protected]>:
>> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 09:09:04 -0800
>> From: [email protected]
>> Subject: Re: Loglan[g] VS Natlang
>> To: [email protected]
>
>> --- On Wed, 1/23/13, Leonardo Castro <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Another possible subtle disadvantage of very regular ortographies is
>> that child students can have more problem to distinguish letter from
>> sound ( ("grapheme" from "phone/phoneme" in our jargon). But I don't
>> know if the irregularity of English orthography solves this "problem"
>> because I have the impression that some anglophone children also think
>> they "a" _is_ /ei/. I wonder if they even notice that the "a" of
>> "latter" is different from that of "later".
>> ===============================================
>> That's explained (or at least used to be...) as "long a" /ei/ vs. "short a"
>> /æ/, just like "long i" /ai/ vs. "short i" /I/, "long o" /ow/ vs. "short"
>> /a/, and others....
>> ========================================
>
> Since that's the justification of orthographically doubling consonants and
> applying "silent e" (which is why "latter" *is* read and written differently
> from "later"; "hope" vs. "hop"), yes, that explanation is still around in the
> primary school classroom.
>
>> Sometimes it's incredible what even adults don't perceive in its
>> language. I have know people who's hardly convinced that pairs like
>> "v" and "f" are articulated in the same way. Many Brazilians don't
>> note that they pronounce the t's of "ta" and "ti" different from each
>> other: in many dialects, they are /ta/ and /tSi/, and others can't be
>> convinced that the "t" of "ti" is more similar to those of "ta, te,
>> to, tu" in dialects of Nordeste (which is considered "wrong
>> Portuguese" by some people). Finally, many are not aware that they
>> reduce /o/ to /u/ and /e/ to /i/ in many words.
>
>> Somebody has once told me that Americans usually don't perceive that
>> they "flap" their "t" and "d" (although it's obvious for strangers
>> whose /t/ and /d/ are not related to the alveolar flap).
>
> Isn't that, like, the whole point of the notion of the phoneme and the
> allophone? That certain English speakers perceive the "t" in "tar", "star",
> "mortar" and "latter" as /t/ doesn't make them clueless wonders; that's just
> the nature of English /t/ (whereas an Indian retroflex does not fall in /t/
> territory and marks you clearly as not from round 'chere). Who writhes in
> angst over differences in allophones in their only language except
> linguophiles? Meanwhile, we can spot the difference between "sheet" and
> "shit" at fifty paces, something that seems to mercurially elude many an L2
> English speaker to the constant amusement or horror of the natives.
>
>> =====================================================
>
>> I don't know what the solution would be.
>
> And the problem is...?
>
>>Ideally, kids should be taught at least a little about phonetics/phonemics
>>and the IPA; it would certainly help learners of foreign langs. like French
>>and German I think, and might even make monolingual >Engl. speakers a little
>>more aware of what's going on in their own language.
>
> I'm *all* for learning for learning's sake and generally having a more
> self-aware, sophisticated, and savvy populace. But as linguophiles, must we
> look utterly aghast if a non-linguophile eats their linguistic pie with the
> salad fork?
>
> Kou
>
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
2.5. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
Posted by: "Charles W Brickner" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:44 am ((PST))
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Douglas Koller
Meanwhile, we can spot the difference between "sheet" and "shit" at fifty
paces, something that seems to mercurially elude many an L2 English speaker
to the constant amusement or horror of the natives.
=====================================================
I am reminded of a startling moment when I was a student nurse back in the
early 60s. While caring for a patient, the Filipina doctor asked me to go
get her a clean shit.
Charlie
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
2.6. Re: On not perceiving (was: RE: Loglan[g] VS Natlang)
Posted by: "Logan Kearsley" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:49 am ((PST))
On 24 January 2013 08:44, Charles W Brickner <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf Of Douglas Koller
>
> Meanwhile, we can spot the difference between "sheet" and "shit" at fifty
> paces, something that seems to mercurially elude many an L2 English speaker
> to the constant amusement or horror of the natives.
> =====================================================
> I am reminded of a startling moment when I was a student nurse back in the
> early 60s. While caring for a patient, the Filipina doctor asked me to go
> get her a clean shit.
What truly boggles me about L2 English speakers' use of those phonemes
is that I once knew a Russian man who seemed to have absolutely
flawless English, perfect American accent, always produced the i/I
distinction correctly... until one day he asked me why a candy bar is
named after a kind of shoe. What? "You know, 'sneakers'." ...
"Snickers?" "Yeah, sneakers."
And upon inspection, apparently he could not hear the difference. But
he could *say* it in all the other correct positions.
I have no explanation.
-l.
Messages in this topic (29)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Is this a conlang?
Posted by: "taliesin the storyteller" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 12:35 am ((PST))
I've been playing a lot of the PS3-game Journey lately, very much
recommend it as it relaxing and short enough to finish in one sitting. I
was a bit impatient on my first play-through, finished it in less than
two hours.
So, if you have a PS3, get Journey (it is downloadable and not very
expensive), play it through once without any aids, then come back here
afterwards, as what follows can be seen as a spoiler!
(If you don't have a PS3 and can afford the cheapest one, get one, then
play Journey, as this is the best game so far this decade =) Or if a
friend have a PS3, give them Journey and watch them play or ask to play
yourself...)
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
This is the song of the end credits. I do not recognize the words. Is it
a language, or sounds made to be beautiful, and how would we know the
difference?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qizpBpHTzkU
t., *piiing* *pong* *pong* *peng*
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Is this a conlang?
Posted by: "Cíat Ó Gáibhtheacháin" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:31 am ((PST))
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 09:35:23AM +0100, taliesin the storyteller wrote:
> I've been playing a lot of the PS3-game Journey lately, very much
> recommend it as it relaxing and short enough to finish in one sitting. I
> was a bit impatient on my first play-through, finished it in less than
> two hours.
Haven't played it myself, but I have watched playthroughs. It's quite..
affecting, for want of a better word.
<snip>
> This is the song of the end credits. I do not recognize the words. Is it
> a language, or sounds made to be beautiful, and how would we know the
> difference?
The best person to ask might be the composer, Austin Wintory:
https://twitter.com/awintory
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qizpBpHTzkU
--
Cíat Ó Gáibhtheacháin - [email protected] - http://stereochro.me/ - CF9F6473
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Is this a conlang?
Posted by: "Nikolay Ivankov" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:37 am ((PST))
It is a mix of citations from of Aeneid, Beowulf, Joan d'Arc and a
classical hokku (I've forgotten the name of the author). So it's no
conlang. There are vids with lyrics on YouTube.
24.01.2013 9:35 ÐÏÌØÚÏ×ÁÔÅÌØ "taliesin the storyteller" <
[email protected]> ÎÁÐÉÓÁÌ:
> I've been playing a lot of the PS3-game Journey lately, very much
> recommend it as it relaxing and short enough to finish in one sitting. I
> was a bit impatient on my first play-through, finished it in less than two
> hours.
>
> So, if you have a PS3, get Journey (it is downloadable and not very
> expensive), play it through once without any aids, then come back here
> afterwards, as what follows can be seen as a spoiler!
>
> (If you don't have a PS3 and can afford the cheapest one, get one, then
> play Journey, as this is the best game so far this decade =) Or if a friend
> have a PS3, give them Journey and watch them play or ask to play
> yourself...)
>
> s
> p
> o
> i
> l
> e
> r
> s
> p
> a
> c
> e
>
> This is the song of the end credits. I do not recognize the words. Is it a
> language, or sounds made to be beautiful, and how would we know the
> difference?
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=qizpBpHTzkU<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qizpBpHTzkU>
>
>
> t., *piiing* *pong* *pong* *peng*
>
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: single words for concepts for which other languages paraphrase
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 1:19 am ((PST))
>Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:55:38 +0100
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: single words for concepts for which other languages paraphrase
> To: [email protected]
> On Monday 21 January 2013 22:35:52 Leonardo Castro wrote:
> > 2013/1/21 A. da Mek:
> > >> the Czech author Milan Kundera doesn't understand how non-Czech
> > >> languages could possibly do without an equivalent to the Czech word
> > >> "litost," to which an English speaker sort of just shrugs when he/she
> > >> hears the word translated as "a state of torment created by the sudden
> > >> sight of one's own misery."
> > > Do not take him too seriously. This is only one of possible meanings, and
> > > the
> > > more precise word for it would be rather "sebelítost", self-pity.
> > > "Lítost" simply means regret, pity or sorrow (there is a German cognate
> > > "Leid"); it is not a specialised word for cry in one's beer.
> > As you said this, I'm encouraged to say that I feel that the
> > Portuguese word "saudade" is much more generic than a feeling of
> > wistful longing for something one once knew and which might never
> > return (as also cited in the original message).
> How many of us have such words in our conlangs?
Following the model of my German-English dictionary, which says if a concept
doesn't translate well (it seemed there was some type of German cake? (also
various terms in the German educational and governmental systems)), it's just
going to *explain* it and to hell with a simple gloss, if I feel the need to
coin an indispensible word to the Géarthçins psyche that requires a definition
like:
"a state of torment created by the sudden sight of one's own misery" (and let
us not forget the plaintive wailing of a dog that goes with that) or
"a feeling of wistful longing for something one once knew and which might never
return"
I just explain those words in italics on the Géarthnuns-English side with no
corresponding entry on the English-Géarthnuns side. However, since there's no
English cross reference, I've made a cheat sheet so if I'm thinking of one of
*those* words, I can access it quickly. There are about fifteen thus far, and
you could probably pare that down by half to the words of the totally twee and
obnoxiously 'untranslatable' "hygge", "lítost", "saudade", "Gemütlichkeit",
"wabi-sabi" variety.
Kou
Messages in this topic (12)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: to be cognate or not to be cognate
Posted by: "Leonardo Castro" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 2:05 am ((PST))
2013/1/23 Njenfalgar <[email protected]>:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a question for the list which may be of interest to all diachronic
> conlangers here. As I'm now learning my fourth Romance language
> (Portuguese) I am starting to notice that certain words are cognate in all
> Romance languages I know (as "to open": French "ouvrir", Catalan "obrir",
> Spanish "abrir", Portuguese "abrir") while others never are (as "to close":
> French "fermer" < Lat. firmare, Catalan "tancar" < some Pre-Roman language,
> Spanish "cerrar" < Lat. serare, Portuguese "fechar" < Lat. factus).
Interesting, I have never noticed that. And also Italian with "aprire"
and "chiudere" (although they have also "firmare" with a completely
different meaning).
Portuguese has (apparent) cognates of all these words:
firmar : to firm, to sign, to establish, to consolidate, to support a
structure to make it firm; (firma can mean "enterprise", "enterprise
official registry", "registered signature", etc.) ;
trancar : to lock ;
cerrar : old-fashioned synonym of "fechar"; nowadays, it's used
poetically in "cerrar os olhos" (lit. close the eyes) and it's
conserved in the name of a savanna ecoregion and vegetation of Brazil:
"cerrado".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerrado
> Now we
> all know that words for concepts invented *after* a language split will not
> be cognate, but I had always thought closing things would have been
> invented quite early... Does anyone know whether this observation of mine
> is just due to random chance or whether there just are certain words that
> are more likely to be replaced during language evolution?
>
> Greets,
> David
>
> --
> Dos ony tãsnonnop, koták ony tãsnonnop.
>
> http://njenfalgar.conlang.org/
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
5b. Re: to be cognate or not to be cognate
Posted by: "Charles W Brickner" [email protected]
Date: Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:40 am ((PST))
-----Original Message-----
Subject: to be cognate or not to be cognate
2013/1/23 Njenfalgar <[email protected]>:
> As I'm now learning my fourth Romance
> language (Portuguese) I am starting to notice that certain words are
cognate in
> all Romance languages I know (as "to open": French "ouvrir", Catalan
> "obrir", Spanish "abrir", Portuguese "abrir") while others never are (as
"to close":
> French "fermer" < Lat. firmare, Catalan "tancar" < some Pre-Roman
> language, Spanish "cerrar" < Lat. serare, Portuguese "fechar" < Lat.
factus).
=======================
The Romanian cognates are interesting.
To close is 'închide'. To open is 'deschide'.
To my non-professional eye '-chide' has to be cognate to the Italian
'chiudere' < Lat. 'claudere', shut.
Thus, the Romanian word for close means "to shut in" and the word for open
means "to unclose".
Charlie
Messages in this topic (7)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
