There are 11 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: On Creating Altlangs
From: Roger Mills
1b. Re: On Creating Altlangs
From: Alex Fink
1c. Re: On Creating Altlangs
From: father's personal
2a. Re: Glossotechnia
From: Jim Henry
3a. "Glossarch" is officially a word
From: Daniel Bowman
3b. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
From: Roger Mills
3c. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
From: Adam Walker
3d. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
From: Daniel Bowman
3e. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
From: Daniel Bowman
4a. Re: Updated Jarda numbers page
From: Herman Miller
5a. Re: Koha
From: Anthony Miles
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: On Creating Altlangs
Posted by: "Roger Mills" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 12:54 pm ((PST))
--- On Tue, 2/19/13, James Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
Romanian is almost a real life altlang and IMO quite a cool language. It
doesn't have an identical phonology to the surrounding Balkan or Slavic
languages, nor did it go through the same sound changes but it is obviously
influenced by them and different enough from the other Romance languages (while
still obviously Romance) without resembling greatly any other language.
=========================================
Indeed. Years ago, when I was in Rome, I listened to Radio Vatican a lot (good
music!). Then they'd have broadcasts in various languages....One was obviously
Romance, but nothing I was familiar with. Maybe Catalan?? But noooo-- it was
Romanian !!
General question: what's the "etymology" of _bogolang_? bogus??? It's new to
me. Incidentally I find "glosarch" a perfectly good formation--- after all, we
have autarch (Gene Wolfe's books), heresiarch and a few others (tetrarch IIRC,
what's that?), hardly in wide circulation.
Messages in this topic (19)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: On Creating Altlangs
Posted by: "Alex Fink" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:08 pm ((PST))
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:54:06 -0800, Roger Mills <[email protected]> wrote:
>General question: what's the "etymology" of _bogolang_? bogus??? It's new to
>me. Incidentally I find "glosarch" a perfectly good formation--- after all, we
>have autarch (Gene Wolfe's books), heresiarch and a few others (tetrarch IIRC,
>what's that?), hardly in wide circulation.
"Bogus", yes. For me the term calls particularly to mind Geoff Eddy's primer
which invents a Slavicised romlang:
http://jc.tech-galaxy.com/bricka/bogo_linguistics.html
If I read the initial paragraph not too wrongly, Geoff was the first one to
apply "bogus" to the process but the formation "bogolang" was someone else's
contribution.
On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 21:33:37 +0100, Jörg Rhiemeier <[email protected]>
wrote:
>On Tuesday 19 February 2013 20:39:08 R A Brown wrote:
>
>> I fail to understand how a living language
>> can be "almost a real life altlang."
>
>A "real life altlang" is a contradiction in terms.
Agreed, as is "real life bogolang"; this part of the thread is kinda fatuous.
If we try to force the terms to apply to natlangs we catch anything that has
had its phonology (for that's the part conlangers usually substitute)
influenced by language contact effects, and that's a lot. Even if two natlangs
did converge phonologically so much that the sound changes applying to them
eventually became identical, what is there to make one the template and one the
bogus one?
Alex
Messages in this topic (19)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: On Creating Altlangs
Posted by: "father's personal" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 1:20 pm ((PST))
----- Original Message -----
--- On Tue, 2/19/13, James Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
General question: what's the "etymology" of _bogolang_? bogus??? It's new to
me. Incidentally I find "glosarch" a perfectly good formation--- after all, we
have autarch (Gene Wolfe's books), heresiarch and a few others (tetrarch IIRC,
what's that?), hardly in wide circulation.
====================
A tetrarch is the ruler of a fourth. There are several uses of it in Roman
history. I am most familiar with its use in the New Testament as the Roman
name for the four sons of Herod the Great. Rome would not give rule over the
whole country to one man and divided Judea into four portions, one for each of
them, thus breaking up a potential hot spot. There is some discussion, though,
as to whether there were three or four divisions. Luke in his gospel mentions
Herod Antipas as the tetrarch of Galilee.
Charlie
Messages in this topic (19)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: Glossotechnia
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:08 pm ((PST))
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 1:31 AM, Daniel Demski <[email protected]> wrote:
> Topicality (Grammar): Each sentence has a topic and comment, distinguished
> by word order, affix, particle, or another mechanism.
> Topicality (Express a Category): Coin a method for expressing topicality.
>
> Or, just the second card? Or, just a generic Express a Category card,
> The reason I don't like having something like the first card is because
> then all these category markings would be obligatory. I want someone to be
What about something like this:
"Specify how, when and whether [agency / topicality / definiteness /
... / wildcard grammatical category ] is marked. By affix, mutation
or separate particle? (Coin one or more affixes or particles.)
Mandatory or optional? On which types of word?"
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. "Glossarch" is officially a word
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 3:50 pm ((PST))
Yes! Glossarch is officially a word!
I say this slightly tongue in cheek, but as I recall, I stated that I did not
feel comfortable calling "glossarch" a word because I was the only one who used
it.
I just tried searching for it to prove my point and comment on Roger Mill's
recent reply on the Altlangs thread.
Well, turns out I have to eat my words, because I ran across this:
http://trainstation.wikia.com/wiki/User:Koppadasao
So I am not the only one. Whoever this is (a list member?) apparently read our
thread a few months back on what to call the creator of a language, as opposed
to the first speaker of it, etc. The person adopted both "primorator" and
"glossarch."
Danny
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
Posted by: "Roger Mills" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 5:24 pm ((PST))
--- On Tue, 2/19/13, Daniel Bowman <[email protected]> wrote:
Yes! Glossarch is officially a word!
I say this slightly tongue in cheek, but as I recall, I stated that I did not
feel comfortable calling "glossarch" a word because I was the only one who used
it.
I just tried searching for it to prove my point and comment on Roger Mill's
recent reply on the Altlangs thread.
Well, turns out I have to eat my words, because I ran across this:
http://trainstation.wikia.com/wiki/User:Koppadasao
So I am not the only one. Whoever this is (a list member?)
======================================
I think s/he used to post here; IIRC s/he's Brazilian
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
Posted by: "Adam Walker" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:15 pm ((PST))
He's Norwegian. And he exhibited very troll-like behavior on list.
Adam
On 2/19/13, Roger Mills <[email protected]> wrote:
> --- On Tue, 2/19/13, Daniel Bowman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes! Glossarch is officially a word!
>
> I say this slightly tongue in cheek, but as I recall, I stated that I did
> not feel comfortable calling "glossarch" a word because I was the only one
> who used it.
> I just tried searching for it to prove my point and comment on Roger Mill's
> recent reply on the Altlangs thread.
>
> Well, turns out I have to eat my words, because I ran across this:
> http://trainstation.wikia.com/wiki/User:Koppadasao
>
> So I am not the only one. Whoever this is (a list member?)
> ======================================
>
> I think s/he used to post here; IIRC s/he's Brazilian
>
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3d. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:44 pm ((PST))
2013/2/19 Adam Walker <[email protected]>
> He's Norwegian. And he exhibited very troll-like behavior on list.
>
> Adam
>
> >
>
Considering the info on the website link I posted, I'm not terribly shocked
to hear that.
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
3e. Re: "Glossarch" is officially a word
Posted by: "Daniel Bowman" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 7:44 pm ((PST))
The only other user of glossarch is a troll...wonderful.
2013/2/19 Daniel Bowman <[email protected]>
>
> 2013/2/19 Adam Walker <[email protected]>
>
>> He's Norwegian. And he exhibited very troll-like behavior on list.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> >
>>
>
> Considering the info on the website link I posted, I'm not terribly
> shocked to hear that.
>
Messages in this topic (5)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: Updated Jarda numbers page
Posted by: "Herman Miller" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:28 pm ((PST))
On 2/18/2013 11:31 PM, Roger Mills wrote:
> Minor question: What's to prevent _JaGkovRom ģağkôvṛôm (3*6+8) means
> "26"_ from being interpreted as 3*(6+8) i.e 3*14= 42?
For one thing, "6+8" would actually be written "8+6" (always with the
larger number on the left if you're adding). But as I remarked on the
web page, the calculation is always from left to right. So you group the
first two numeric roots together, add or multiply, then group the result
with the next root, and so on, until you reach a classifier. For
3*(8+6), you'd need to separate the 3 from the 8+6 with the classifier
"ģê": "ģağģê ṛômkôv" [ɟaɣɟe ɻomkov].
In practice, multiplication is almost exclusively used with powers of 8
or 12 on the right. Forms like "ṛalkôṛ" (2*9) are atypical enough, and
"ģağģê ṛômkôv" would be considered weird (like the English equivalent
"thrice fourteen").
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5a. Re: Koha
Posted by: "Anthony Miles" [email protected]
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:33 pm ((PST))
--- On Tue, 2/12/13, Anthony Miles <[email protected]> wrote:
On 2/6/2013 10:49 PM, Anthony Miles wrote:
>> Koha is a German-derived language spoken on the Earth of the
>> "Eis-Lehre-Welt (ELW)" cosm of the Polycosm, the equivalent of all
>> the Pacific Ocean creoles on OTL's Earth. It started as an
>> slow-burning experiment in late 2011 to see how much of German syntax
>> could survive extreme simplification (most of it, as it turns out).
>I like this; it looks vaguely Pacific at first glance, but you can see
>the Germanic roots if you point them out. Interesting though that it
>appears to have /o/ but no /u/. (I'd have expected "muka" for "mother".)
Na mi me'a ka ku 'ena ka voka ho Koha Elopa hi he'a. (It pleases me [schmeckt,
not passt gut] that you can see the words from [European] German.).
RM That was my first impression too. Knowing a bit about Polynesian sound
changes helped,....
/u/ is a phoneme in Koha - the Tosa (pre-Koha) word for "mother" was 'ti muta'.
Rule:
u > o/_Ca#
Note that /e/ does not exhibit this behavior.
RM the u > o/ __Ca# is a common though sporadic change in Oceania. Also true of
i > e /__Ca#. And to top it off, you can also have (sporadic again)
a > o > __Cu# and a > e/__Ci#. Makes cognate-hunting a tricky operation :-)))
The vocabulary of Koha is a bit small, but it was used as a contact language,
so KISS applies.
RM I found it interesting and rather amusing. Years ago, another conlanger and
I tried to devise a Latin-Polynesian language (based on the idea of a lost
Roman trading vessel), but it didn't get very far..... Polynesian sound changes
produced way too many homonyms from the Latin.
AM:
I remember that conlang. It looked like fun. There was a lively discussion
about the diachronics of 'porcus'.
Originally, I was going to have other rules besides u>0/_Ca#, includig i>e/C_#
but too many words ended up /CaCa/. Which might be fun if I had planned to
expose Koha to a Semitic verbal system (not in the ELW, however; that's for
German stuff), but I wanted to keep the experiment simple. I realized early on
that the small vocabulary would be a problem; Koha speakers solve those
ambiguities with adjectives. The singular form is usally the one that survives
in Koha, unless the signular form is really, really short (/mena/ not /ma/).
For those who are curious, Tosa had three cases, but massive confusion between
the default cases of a Philippine language and default cases of Tosa led to the
disappearance of case altogether.
Avikahea! (Aufwiedersehen!)
Messages in this topic (5)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
