There are 14 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
From: BPJ
1b. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
From: Douglas Koller
1c. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
From: Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews
1d. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
From: BPJ
1e. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
From: BPJ
2a. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
From: Gary Shannon
2b. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
From: Jörg Rhiemeier
2c. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
From: Jim Henry
2d. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
From: Gary Shannon
2e. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
From: Jim Henry
3a. Re: Request for a free children's picture textbooks/ABC suitable for
From: Padraic Brown
4a. Re: 12 types of language
From: MorphemeAddict
4b. Re: 12 types of language
From: Jim Henry
5.1. Re: Pesky morphemes
From: And Rosta
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
Posted by: "BPJ" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:44 pm ((PDT))
On 2013-03-25 17:24, Roger Mills wrote:
> But even words that are just near-homophones get confused, esp. (I've
> noticed) "gibe" and "jive", "rack" and "wrack" (the latter admittedly rare),
> and the egregious use-- sometimes even in places where a good copy editor
> ought to have caught it-- of "loose" for "lose".
I have been a copy editor in both Swedish and English
for over a decade now and I still have to stop and think
for every "loose/lose" and "choose/chose". There even
are some such cases in Swedish. The Swedish texts I edit
are frequently translated by non-native Swedish speakers
who often get tripped by the 18 different ways /x/ can
be spelled. Although I don't have that problem myself
I have to be on guard against missing a misspelling
which coincides with the correct spelling of another word.
I don't think I ever missed a 'plain' misspelling even
on first reading.
You shouldn't copy-edit when you are tired, but in
a non-perfect world you often have to.
/bpj
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 8:54 pm ((PDT))
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:43:56 +0100
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
> To: [email protected]
> The Swedish texts I edit
> are frequently translated by non-native Swedish speakers
> who often get tripped by the 18 different ways /x/ can
> be spelled.
Oh, come now. You can't just drop a little bon-bon like that and walk away.
What *are* they? If there's a quick and dirty list of those somewhere, I'd be
interested either here or offlist. I can probably come up with about half
without breaking a sweat, but why have an aneurysm at 12 or 13 reinventing the
wheel if there's an extant list? If there isn't such a list, it's okay -- I'll
still get to sleep tonight.
Kou
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
Posted by: "Nicole Valicia Thompson-Andrews" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 9:17 pm ((PDT))
I'm curious too. I'm also curious to see if my screen reader will switch to
Swedish or not. I installed all the high-quality voice packs they had.
-----Original Message-----
From: Constructed Languages List [mailto:[email protected]] On
Behalf Of Douglas Koller
Sent: Monday, March 25, 2013 8:55 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 22:43:56 +0100
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
> To: [email protected]
> The Swedish texts I edit
> are frequently translated by non-native Swedish speakers
> who often get tripped by the 18 different ways /x/ can
> be spelled.
Oh, come now. You can't just drop a little bon-bon like that and walk away.
What *are* they? If there's a quick and dirty list of those somewhere, I'd
be interested either here or offlist. I can probably come up with about half
without breaking a sweat, but why have an aneurysm at 12 or 13 reinventing
the wheel if there's an extant list? If there isn't such a list, it's okay
-- I'll still get to sleep tonight.
Kou =
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1d. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
Posted by: "BPJ" [email protected]
Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:17 am ((PDT))
On 2013-03-26 04:54, Douglas Koller wrote:
> Oh, come now. You can't just drop a little bon-bon
> like that and walk away. What *are* they? If there's
> a quick and dirty list of those somewhere, I'd be
> interested either here or offlist. I can probably
> come up with about half without breaking a sweat, but
> why have an aneurysm at 12 or 13 reinventing the
> wheel if there's an extant list? If there isn't such
> a list, it's okay -- I'll still get to sleep tonight.
OK here goes the official list, in alphabetical order.
The official list is even longer than mine because I
regarded some as instances of one of the others with a
silent _e_ or with doubled consonants, and I overlooked
some. All except those marked with * overlap with
other phonemes or sequences of phonemes. I don't know
what Nicole's screenreader will make of the list but I
tried to be mindful of marking it up sensibly!
1) ch -- chef.
2) che -- apache -- but I have /aËpatÉe/ for this one!
3) g -- geni -- 'genius'.
4) ge -- bagage.
5) gi -- religiös.
6) ige -- beige.
7) j -- jour -- 'emergency duty'.
8) je -- damejeanne -- obsolete, unlike the name Jeanette.
9) sc -- crescendo -- I have /Ê/ rather than /x/ in this word,
so I guess it's an unassimilated foreign
word for me; ditto for _fascist,
fascism_.
10) sch* -- schack -- 'chess'.
11) sh* -- shunt.
12) shi -- fashionabel.
13) si -- division -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
14) sj* -- sju -- '7'.
15) sk -- skön -- 'nice, comfortable'.
16) skj* -- skjorta -- 'shirt'.
17) ssi -- mission -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
18) ssj -- ryssja -- 'fyke (hoop) net'.
19) stg -- västgöte -- inhabitant of Västergötland/Västgötland
province, and only in these two words.
I guess the official spelling of the
name of the province makes yet another
spelling for /x/: _sterg_!
20) sti -- suggestion -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
21) stj* -- stjärna -- 'star'.
22) ti -- station -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
23) xi -- reflexion.
24) xj -- Växjö -- a place name /ËvÉkxøË/ only;
Old Swedish _Wägh-siö_ 'Road Lake'.
/bpj
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
1e. Re: Creating a Conlang with homophones
Posted by: "BPJ" [email protected]
Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 4:42 am ((PDT))
I forgot to note that _xi_ in _reflexion_ is /kx/.
Corrected below!
On 2013-03-26 11:17, BPJ wrote:
> On 2013-03-26 04:54, Douglas Koller wrote:
>> Oh, come now. You can't just drop a little bon-bon
>> like that and walk away. What *are* they? If there's
>> a quick and dirty list of those somewhere, I'd be
>> interested either here or offlist. I can probably
>> come up with about half without breaking a sweat, but
>> why have an aneurysm at 12 or 13 reinventing the
>> wheel if there's an extant list? If there isn't such
>> a list, it's okay -- I'll still get to sleep tonight.
>
> OK here goes the official list, in alphabetical order.
> The official list is even longer than mine because I
> regarded some as instances of one of the others with a
> silent _e_ or with doubled consonants, and I overlooked
> some. All except those marked with * overlap with
> other phonemes or sequences of phonemes. I don't know
> what Nicole's screenreader will make of the list but I
> tried to be mindful of marking it up sensibly!
>
> 1) ch -- chef.
> 2) che -- apache -- but I have /aËpatÉe/ for this one!
> 3) g -- geni -- 'genius'.
> 4) ge -- bagage.
> 5) gi -- religiös.
> 6) ige -- beige.
> 7) j -- jour -- 'emergency duty'.
> 8) je -- damejeanne -- obsolete, unlike the name Jeanette.
> 9) sc -- crescendo -- I have /Ê/ rather than /x/ in this word,
> so I guess it's an unassimilated foreign
> word for me; ditto for _fascist,
> fascism_.
> 10) sch* -- schack -- 'chess'.
> 11) sh* -- shunt.
> 12) shi -- fashionabel.
> 13) si -- division -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
> 14) sj* -- sju -- '7'.
> 15) sk -- skön -- 'nice, comfortable'.
> 16) skj* -- skjorta -- 'shirt'.
> 17) ssi -- mission -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
> 18) ssj -- ryssja -- 'fyke (hoop) net'.
> 19) stg -- västgöte -- inhabitant of Västergötland/Västgötland
> province, and only in these two words.
> I guess the official spelling of the
> name of the province makes yet another
> spelling for /x/: _sterg_!
> 20) sti -- suggestion -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
> 21) stj* -- stjärna -- 'star'.
> 22) ti -- station -- only with the _-ion_ morpheme!
> 23) xi -- reflexion. -- /reflekËxuËn/
> 24) xj -- Växjö -- a place name /ËvÉkxøË/ only;
> Old Swedish _Wägh-siö_ 'Road Lake'.
>
> /bpj
>
Messages in this topic (10)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:01 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 2:27 PM, H. S. Teoh <[email protected]> wrote:
---
>> counting words might be initially limited to "one, two, three, many".
>> The lexicon should probably contain pointing words "this" (near me),
>> "that" (near you), "yonder" (far from both of us), also monosyllabic.
>
> I argue that counting words are already too abstract. Let there be
> distinct words for thumbs, fingers, and hands, and one could derive
> numbers from them by combination with the verb "point".
I guess it depends on how far back you want to start. I suppose one
could start with primate grunts and gestures too. The choice of
starting point is arbitrary, but I like mine to be a little bit
further along the hypothetical path from animal noises to modern
language. Otherwise it would take an impractical amount of time to
develop anything useful.
> And 'this' and 'that' are too anglo-centric.
Pointing words are ubiquitous. The three-way distinction
this/that/yonder is definitely not anglo-centric since English has
pretty much dropped the distinction between that and yonder, even
though the distinction is still maintained in other languages.
(Spanish, for example).
> There should just be a
> single demonstrative for drawing the listener's attention to something.
> It could be the equivalent of "hey!", for all we know.
\
---
Again, I think that goes back too far into the prehistory of language
to suit my own preferences. Beside, if there are too few monosyllabic
roots to begin with then coining new words becomes much more difficult
since there is less raw material to work with.
>
>> Sentences would consist of agent/subject before object/patient with
>> action either between those two or after both, with no initial
>> preference for either.
>
> This is too complicated. Sentences should just be a single noun plus a
> single verb.
---
Another arbitrary choice concerning just how "primitive" to begin the
project. I consider my choice to be my own personal "Goldilocks zone"
where it's not too primitive, nor too advanced, but just right. At
some point there has to be an object. If we start with "wood burn"
where "burn" is intransitive, then in order to make "me" the cause of
the wood (agent) burning, some verb with an object needs to be used,
like "I cause (that) wood burn". Rather than make life too complicated
for myself I would prefer to start with some natively transitive
verbs. Besides, I suspect that intransitive verbs may have pre-dated
subordinating conjunctions or implicit subordinate noun clauses.
---
>> For example, suppose the pointing word "ho" means "this/here", and the
>> word "yi" means "person". We could coin a first person singular
>> pronoun from the set phrase "ho yi" = "this person" Later that might
>> be eroded to "hoi", and later still to "oi". Only the vowels remain
>> from the original "ho yi", but the conlang now has a first person
>> singular pronoun with a documented pedigree, rather than some
>> arbitrary word coined out of thin air.
>
> I don't like this. Pronouns should derive directly from nouns (possibly
> proper nouns).
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this. I prefer to derive
my pronouns from pointing words. Lacking historical precedent I
imagine it's a matter of personal preference.
---
>. The dominant leader simply
> refers to himself as "chief" or "dad" or whatever his name is. Everyone
> else is the equivalent of "underling". Later, the leader dies and the
> subordinates split off into their own groups, so they each regard
> themselves as the leader of their respective group, and start referring
> to themselves as "chief",
---
But how does an underling come to use the same first person singular
pronoun then? Everyone in the tribe does not call himself or herself
"chief", so "chief" can never come to me "I/me". To everyone except
the chief, "chief" means "that person over there". Nope. That doesn't
work for me. (again, a matter of personal taste.)
>
>> Similarly, "you" might begin as "ta yi" = "that (near you) person",
---
>
> "You (singular)" can just be the equivalent of "hey!", and "you
> (plural)" can develop from the combination of "you and you!" (the
> interspersing conjunction can be omitted, if you want to *really* start
> from the bare basics).
That sound reasonable. Of course the conjunction hasn't been invented
yet, so using it would not be permitted until later, probably well
after the pronouns had already emerged.
>
---
>
> There's no reason to prefer prepositions over postpositions. It all
> depends on the order of the initial sentence template. Different paths
> of development could lead to dialects, and eventually full-fledged
> languages in their own right.
>
> Also, given enough time, adpositions can develop into declensions.
True on both counts. If the verb is preferred after the object then
demoted verbs would become postpositions.
Remember too that in theory the whole protolang is unwritten so the
boundary between words is not visually enforced. Merging of words is
much easier without a written form of the language. In practice it
should probably all be written in IPA without any spaces between words
to simulate the continuous sound stream of spoken language.
> [...]
>> If you want a definite article, then you will have to derive it from a
>> pointing word,
---
>
> Definite articles usually arise from demonstratives (this is attested in
> multiple natlangs historically). Demonstratives could arise from just an
> attention-drawing onomapoieum.
>
That works for me.
--gary
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
Posted by: "Jörg Rhiemeier" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:12 pm ((PDT))
Hallo conlangers!
On Monday 25 March 2013 20:15:42 Gary Shannon wrote:
> Imagine a conlang built on the principles of a philosophical language
> consisting of monosyllabic words with broad basic meanings. However,
> in getting from the protolang to the "finished" conlang you would use
> processes of fusion, erosion, vowel mutation, etc., that would
> eventually completely disguise the philosophical nature of the roots.
My first reaction: What a crazy idea! The main purpose of the
diachronic method is of course to make something that verily
resembles a natlang family, and a philosophical language is about
the wrongest thing to start with if you want to do that.
But this could be fun, and yield interesting results, as long as
you don't lay claims of naturalism on them. Gary, you are a font
of interesting ideas about how to make conlangs!
Yet, I do not feel inclined to try it, mainly because I have
enough projects to wrap my mind around already.
--
... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
http://www.joerg-rhiemeier.de/Conlang/index.html
"Bêsel asa Éam, a Éam atha cvanthal a cvanth atha Éamal." - SiM 1:1
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:24 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> Imagine a conlang built on the principles of a philosophical language
> consisting of monosyllabic words with broad basic meanings. However,
> in getting from the protolang to the "finished" conlang you would use
> processes of fusion, erosion, vowel mutation, etc., that would
> eventually completely disguise the philosophical nature of the roots.
This is not entirely dissimilar to the ideas in a thread from three years ago:
http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=CONLANG;irGw%2Fg;201010070854220400A
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
Posted by: "Gary Shannon" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:24 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Jim Henry <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Imagine a conlang built on the principles of a philosophical language
>> consisting of monosyllabic words with broad basic meanings. However,
>> in getting from the protolang to the "finished" conlang you would use
>> processes of fusion, erosion, vowel mutation, etc., that would
>> eventually completely disguise the philosophical nature of the roots.
>
> This is not entirely dissimilar to the ideas in a thread from three years ago:
>
> http://listserv.brown.edu/archives/cgi-bin/wa?A2=CONLANG;irGw%2Fg;201010070854220400A
ROFLMAO!
That thread begins: "My recent reading of Guy Deutscher's _The
Unfolding of Language_
suggested two possible conlang projects. ..."
This very morning I finished reading Guy Deutscher's _The Unfolding of
Language_ and that's what sparked this idea. So rather than blazing a
new trail I've just stumbled upon an existing highway! :-)
Thanks for remembering that thread!
I'd still like to give it a try, though.
--gary
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: A Philosophical Language as Proto-Conlang
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [email protected]
Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:23 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Gary Shannon <[email protected]> wrote:
> This very morning I finished reading Guy Deutscher's _The Unfolding of
> Language_ and that's what sparked this idea. So rather than blazing a
> new trail I've just stumbled upon an existing highway! :-)
> I'd still like to give it a try, though.
You do that. Your idea is still pretty different from mine, which I
haven't done much with in the last three years (being mainly focused
on gjâ-zym-byn as far as conlanging goes, and more focused on writing
than conlanging).
At some point I should type up my notes on that sketechlang from three
years ago and put them on the web.
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org
Messages in this topic (8)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Request for a free children's picture textbooks/ABC suitable for
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 3:50 pm ((PDT))
--- On Sun, 3/24/13, Gleki Arxokuna <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Here you go: http://fiziwig.com/conlang/resources/mcguffey_one.html
> >
> > I have used it for various of my conlangs. It's public domain.
>
>
> Very nice. What I'm thinking about these days is a picture textbook that
> will use direct method of learning so that the text will be written only
> in one language, namely the one the textbook is written for. That's the
> point of this project.
I might be missing something, but it seems like the links given are exactly
what you're asking for -- a picture book that's written solely in the
conlang. All you have to do is replace the English text, whether it's the
McGuffey reader or a generic ABC book, with your conlang text. Or are you
looking for something else?
Mind you, these sorts of books presume that the children reading them
*already know* English. They're just learning to read it by use of the
book. It's a whole nother kettle of fish to put one of these kinds of
books in front of someone who doesn't know your conlang at all!
> If you see an image of an apple and below it you see either
> "apple" (English)
> " è¹æ" (Chinese)
> "Ñблоко" (Russian)
>
> no questions arise.
>
> Of course not all concepts can be explained that way. But many can be.
> Why not think of them now?
Feel free! Any thoughts as to which you think might be harder than "apple"
(assuming the reader knows what apple means...)?
> There are already some projects like
> Wikijunior<https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior>
> .
> But they are underdeveloped and are for English mostly.
Well, naturally, you'ld have to replace the English text with your own
conlang's text. I think that goes without saying!
I should do one of these for my languages...
Aa vor AAPELEZ standat: lôcke! Wellam onhimthrêwat en rotet aapel at than
thêfe hwicce ganget te thon yastarme!
(Ff is for FRUIT: look! Billie throws a rotten fruit at the thief who's
walking to the gallows! -- from "Rowna-ABC-Boq vor Barnam" or "ABC-Letter
Book for Young Children")
It might be of interest to note that the title, Rowna-ABC-Boq, also means
"Mystical ABCs of Incantations". Given that these books come from the
World, I ought not be surprised...
Padraic
>
>
>
> > --gary
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 24, 2013 at 7:01 AM, Gleki Arxokuna
> > <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > I'm not posting to this group very often. In fact
> I might not agree with
> > some of you what auxlang will win in the future and
> whether it'll be a
> > constructed one. But no matter what is your favorite
> (English, Mandarin and
> > Bislama will also do) I request to organise a search
> for free open-source
> > (CreativeCommons) templates for children's textbooks
> that will teach them
> > any auxlang.
> > >
> > > The actions should be the following:
> > > 1. We create a template for the children's
> textbook (any format will do:
> > Google presentation/document, wiki-page)
> > > 2. We add pictures and text to it. All the titles
> will be in English at
> > first.
> > > 3. Now every auxlanger can copy this template and
> replace all the titles
> > with it's own language.
> > >
> > >
> > > The auxlangers' community seems to be split.
> Almost everyone is
> > developing their own project. So let's unite for this
> project!
> >
>
Messages in this topic (7)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4a. Re: 12 types of language
Posted by: "MorphemeAddict" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:07 pm ((PDT))
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]>wrote:
> http://www.dailywritingtips.com/12-types-of-language/
>
> I was expecting quite different kinds of types.
stevo
> -Mathieu
>
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
4b. Re: 12 types of language
Posted by: "Jim Henry" [email protected]
Date: Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:16 am ((PDT))
On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 7:06 PM, MorphemeAddict <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Mathieu Roy <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> http://www.dailywritingtips.com/12-types-of-language/
>>
>> I was expecting quite different kinds of types.
Yes, this isn't any kind of coherent classification system, but just a
vocabulary-building article with a few random bits of language-related
terminology. Looking at the domain name in the URL explains why.
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/
http://www.jimhenrymedicaltrust.org
Messages in this topic (3)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5.1. Re: Pesky morphemes
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:35 pm ((PDT))
R A Brown, On 25/03/2013 14:03:
> On 25/03/2013 13:41, And Rosta wrote:
>> R A Brown, On 25/03/2013 08:42:
> [snip]
>>>
>>> OK - to avoid turning a thread about morph(on)emes
>>> into 'yet another English phonology thread', let's
>>> take instead: swim ~ swam ~ swum. Then we have
>>> //s.w.IAU.m//.
>>>
>>> That makes sense for English 'strong verbs'. But how
>>> does the morphonemic approach deal with the equivalent
>>> forms of 'weak' and 'mixed' verbs, e.g. love ~ loved ~
>>> loved buy ~ bought ~ bought
>>
>> It hadn't occurred to me to try to handle all variation
>> among inflectional forms as morphonemic alternation. So
>> for {LOVE} you just add /d/ (or maybe //D// = /d, id/)
>> to the stem in syntactically preterite contexts to yield
>> the wordshape.
>
> So basically we're back to good old fashioned morphemes
> here.
As far as the rules of grammar go, it's a mere chunk of phonological material.
That's a bit clearer with Z, which gets suffixed/encliticized under all sorts
of different syntactic conditions.
> But, of course, -(e)d ending is not only in preterite
> contexts, but also in perfect participle contexts (whereas
> _swam_ and _swum_ distinguish the two contexts).
In my analysis (which I have not presented in this discussion), perfect is a
variety of preterite. (There's a contrast between preteriteness added to tense,
which gives the 'past tense' inflected forms, and preteriteness in other
syntactic environments (e.g. added to an auxiliary, to yield the perfect
construction), which gives the default -en participial inflected form.
Only a mere 65 verbs distinguish past tense from participle form.
>> For -ought verbs, you replace the final rime by -ought in
>> preterite contexts. No morphonemes involved here. Nor any
>> morphemes, since no rule of grammar attributes meaning or
>> function directly to the 'morphs' -ed or -ought.
>
> While the 'traditional' morphemic approach takes -(e)d as a
> morpheme, which has grammatical function (and, according to
> some, tho not me, is a "unit of meaning"), unless I've
> misunderstood (which is possible), the traditional morphemic
> analysis of 'bought' is _boug.t_, where -t is a variant of
> the -(e)d morpheme, and, I guess, _bough-_ a variant of
> _buy_.
If it was _boughd_ then I'd be in favour of that analysis. You wouldn't have an
exception to the rule that the preterite form is stem+d, and the
exception-stating rule would just modify the stem from _buy_ to _bough_. But
given it's _bought_, to analyse it as bough+t, you'd need one rule to state the
exceptional stem and another rule to state the exceptional affix. I think it's
simpler to have a rule saying "the worshape of preterite inflected {BUY} is not
stem+d but rather _bought_",
> I wondered if, at least, we might have morphonemic
> //b.UY,OUGH// ??
Seems reasonable.
> The verb _see, saw, seen_ would seem to have at least
> //s.EE,AW// (the comma is probably not the correct symbol)
(Make up the symbols as you see fit!) That also seems reasonable.
> I guess I'm trying to get a unified way of describing what
> happens to English verbs in a preterite and in a perfect
> participle context.
Yes, that makes sense.
> I was doing this with English verbs in order to get a better
> idea how to describe the Latin verbal stems, e.g. see:
> vidÄ ~ vÄ«d ~ vÄ«s
> break: frang ~ frÄg ~ frÄct
> love: amÄ ~ amÄv ~ amÄt
> etc.
>
> The morphemic approach poses problems, and the morphonemic
> approach doesn't appear any more helpful ;)
The amaa one looks relatively tractable. Even the others could be handled like
your suggestions for SEE and BUY, no?
Roger Mills, On 25/03/2013 16:48:
> --- On Mon, 3/25/13, R A Brown<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 25/03/2013 00:06, And Rosta wrote:
>>
>> A morphophoneme, understood as a group of variant
>> phonological forms (phonemes, phoneme sequences) that
>> might be (i) phonologically conditioned, like /s, z,
>> @z~iz/ for English Z-suffix, (ii) morphologically
>> conditioned, like the C in -ic/-icity or the I in
>> divine/divinity, (iii) syntactically conditioned. (ii)
>> is the core class; I'm dubious about (i), and (iii) is
>> not a standard view.
>
> OK - to avoid turning a thread about morph(on)emes into 'yet
> another English phonology thread', let's take instead: swim
> ~ swam ~ swum. Then we have //s.w.IAU.m//.
>
> That makes sense for English 'strong verbs'. But how does
> the morphonemic approach deal with the equivalent forms of
> 'weak' and 'mixed' verbs, e.g.
> love ~ loved ~ loved
> buy ~ bought ~ bought
> ============================================
>
> Exactly. I think that's where the idea falls flat on its face :-)))
>
> And IIRC, "swum" was not considered "correct" when I was in grade school many
> years ago....
>
> And the "wrong" assignment of a morphophoneme can lead to interesting
> situations--
>
> bring, brang, brung
That's normal in the dialect local to me in London.
> and how could it possibly account for be, am/are, was/were, been?
If a morphoneme is merely an alternation between chunks of phonological form,
then you could have a morphoneme //be,am,are,was,were// (using Ray's notation).
> Of course, there are historical reasons for things like bring,
> brought, and think, thought, and buy, bought, and all the other
> strong verbs -- but they are no longer operative so the alternation
> just has to be learned and hopefully internalized.
That's right. Internalized as syntactically-conditioned alternations between
phonological forms.
> (And Rosta's (i) and (ii) are easily handled by phonological rules.)
I agree wrt (i). For dialects where Z is /z~s, @z/, I'd handle that by pure
phonology. For dialects where Z is /z~s, iz/, tho, there's no phonological
basis for a rule of i-deletion or i-insertion, so it would be
phonologically-conditioned allomorphy/morphonemics. As for (ii), if putatively
phonological rules are sensitive to the morphological or lexical identity of
phonological forms, then the rules are not really phonological at all. IOW I
follow the school of thought that for principled reasons does not handle
allomorphy and morpho(pho)nology by means of phonology.
--And.
Messages in this topic (50)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
