There are 9 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: adposition cases
From: Eric Christopherson
1b. Re: adposition cases
From: Roger Mills
1c. Re: adposition cases
From: Douglas Koller
2.1. Re: Fiction & language families
From: R A Brown
2.2. Re: Fiction & language families
From: Douglas Koller
2.3. Re: Fiction & language families
From: Muke Tever
2.4. Re: Fiction & language families
From: R A Brown
2.5. Re: Fiction & language families
From: Billy J.B.
3a. Re: Semi-phonemes?
From: And Rosta
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: adposition cases
Posted by: "Eric Christopherson" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:04 pm ((PDT))
On Jun 9, 2013, at 8:29 PM, neo gu <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does anyone know of a natlang which marks spatial cases (locative, allative,
> ablative, perlative) on the adposition rather than the noun? It seems like
> this would be reasonable if the adpositions were originally nouns (although I
> guess the object of the adposition would have to be marked genitive?).
I've only heard of cases where this is flipped around; i.e. you have several
locative words (I'm not sure what technical term there is for those) which are
at least somewhat nounlike, and they can be marked with a spatial or locative
case. E.g.
house-LOC
"at/in/on[/etc.] the house"
house *inside*-LOC
"inside the house"
house *beside*-LOC
"beside the house"
house *outside*-LOC
"outside the house"
where the words surrounded by asterisks are noun-like locative words and -LOC
is a general locative/spatial case. You can also use this schema with other,
more specific, spatial cases, e.g.
house *inside*-ABL
"from inside the house"
house *beside*-ALL
"to the side of the house"
house *outside*-CIR
"around the outside of the house [CIR=circumlative; not sure how common this
case is or whether there's a better term for it]"
And the "house" word could be marked for case itself, and/or have their own
adpositions, e.g. genitive (as you alluded to). Maybe speakers could even
choose from a few cases/adpositions for the "house" word, with or without
changes in meaning.
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
1b. Re: adposition cases
Posted by: "Roger Mills" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jun 10, 2013 8:17 pm ((PDT))
This is probably not relevant, but in Kash, the spatial cases are prepositional
phrases; there is genitive marking, but on the spatial noun (in the case of of
inanim. nouns, which rarely occur in the genitive)-- e.g.
he is inside the house
iya ri onde/ni puna
he LOC inside(Acc)/3sposs house (There is no Acc. ending for inanim. nouns)
he went into the house
iya cosa ri onde/ye/ni puna
.... go LOC inside/DAT/3sposs. house
I saw it behind the house
yu ma/tikas ri çelu/ñi puna (çeluñi = çelum+ni)
it I/see LOC behind/3sposs house
he came from behind the house
ya/rata alo celum/i/ni puna
he/come from behind-Gen-3sposs house
It is behind Shenji
yale ri çelum çenji/yi
2/be LOC back(ACC) Shenji/GEN
(This could also mean 'it is on Shenji's back', e.g yale cici raka ri çelum
çenjiyi (There's a big bug on Shenji's back
it was behind me
yale/sa ri çelumbi (çelumbi = çelum+mi)
3s/be/past LOC behind/1sposs.
It fell on(to the) top of my car
ya/pondam ri nihin/e/ni ñaki/mi
3s/fall LOC top/DAT/3saposs car/1sposs
it fell on top of me
yapondam ri hinine/mi
3s/fall LOC top/DAT/1sposs
It was on top of me
yale/sa ri nihim/bi
3/be/past LOC top(ACC)/1sposs
--- On Mon, 6/10/13, Garth Wallace <[email protected]> wrote:
From: Garth Wallace <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: adposition cases
To: [email protected]
Date: Monday, June 10, 2013, 12:47 PM
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 6:29 PM, neo gu <[email protected]> wrote:
> Does anyone know of a natlang which marks spatial cases (locative, allative,
> ablative, perlative) on the adposition rather than the noun? It seems like
> this would be reasonable if the adpositions were originally nouns (although I
> guess the object of the adposition would have to be marked genitive?).
Wouldn't those generally not be considered cases in that situation?
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
1c. Re: adposition cases
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:35 pm ((PDT))
> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 19:37:17 -0700
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: adposition cases
> To: [email protected]
> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, neo gu <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> Does anyone know of a natlang which marks spatial cases (locative,
> > >> allative, ablative, perlative) on the adposition rather than the
> > >> noun? It seems like this would be reasonable if the adpositions were
> > >> originally nouns (although I guess the object of the adposition would
> > >> have to be marked genitive?).
> > > Wouldn't those generally not be considered cases in that situation?
> > I suppose they wouldn't be called cases; but what would they be called?
> Perhaps "declined adpositions"? A la "conjugated preverbs". Same concept
> really.
If you couldn't get to the link I posted, just googling "Hungarian
postpositions" should suffice. As one example:
mellett - next to, beside
mellé - (to) beside
mellõl - from beside
They follow their nouns (postpositions, quelle surprise -- a ház mellett - next
to the house), but you can also glom possessive suffixes onto these where
English would use a pronoun:
mellettem - beside me
mellém - (to) beside me
mellõlem - from beside me
I don't know what the indigenous term for these is (névutók?), but English,
they just calls 'em postpositions.
Kou
Messages in this topic (9)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2.1. Re: Fiction & language families
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:38 am ((PDT))
On 11/06/2013 02:07, Adam Walker wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Padraic Brown wrote:
>
>> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
>>
[snip]
>>> I have proposed "graftlang", but that hasn't caught
>>> on yet.
>>
>> I think this term makes sense and will use that in
>> preference to "bogolang".
>>
>>
> I can't help thinking of graft as in bribery and official
> corruption when I hear this term.
:)
> I'm supposing that the
> intent is graft as in grafting trees or vines. But some
> how I can't get my mind to want to go there.
I guess that's one possible reason the term has not caught
on. Also, of course, one is not grafting one _language_ on
the root-stock of another language (as one might graft a
tree or vine on the root-stock of another); one is merely
applying the _phonology_ of one language to that of another
(and there's more to language than phonology).
It's an odd idea, and it seems (Vulgar) Latin is the
language that generally undergoes this transmogrification:
e.g. let's take (Vulgar) Latin and apply the phonology of
Tamil to it - et voilà, we have the lost language of the
descendants of the Roman colony established on the cost of
southern India ;)
What to call such conlangs. I agree 'bogolang' is not the
best of terms; but xenophonic conlang is too much of a
mouthful.
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"language
began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
for individual beings and events."
[Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
Messages in this topic (71)
________________________________________________________________________
2.2. Re: Fiction & language families
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2013 3:26 am ((PDT))
> Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 08:38:02 +0100
> From: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: Fiction & language families
> To: [email protected]
> On 11/06/2013 02:07, Adam Walker wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Padraic Brown wrote:
> >> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
> >>> I have proposed "graftlang", but that hasn't caught
> >>> on yet.
> >> I think this term makes sense and will use that in
> >> preference to "bogolang".
> > I can't help thinking of graft as in bribery and official
> > corruption when I hear this term.
> > I'm supposing that the
> > intent is graft as in grafting trees or vines. But some
> > how I can't get my mind to want to go there.
"Bogolang" makes people think of "bogus"? "Graftlang" makes people think of
"people on the take/make"? Geeeeez, I feel positively Pollyanna-ish in
comparison.
> I guess that's one possible reason the term has not caught on.
Or perhaps, that I hadn't heard the term before the last day or two. I could
live with it.
> Also, of course, one is not grafting one _language_ on
> the root-stock of another language (as one might graft a
> tree or vine on the root-stock of another); one is merely
> applying the _phonology_ of one language to that of another
> (and there's more to language than phonology).
While in my head of heads I technically know that that's what grafting actually
*is*, I still tend to run with the layperson perception of it as just blending.
Graft a peach onto a plum tree or vice versa and poof, get a nectarine (I know,
I know -- I just found out last week that that's not what a nectarine is),
seedless oranges, square watermelons... "Graftlang" sounds just peachy to me.
(Did I just say that?)
> It's an odd idea,
It's a fanciful idea
> and it seems (Vulgar) Latin is the
> language that generally undergoes this transmogrification:
Some of us caught the conlang bug upon exposure to high school Latin. Many of
us got a hefty dose of romance lang in high school as well. And the Romans did
tend to get around a lot in the name of empire. And lots of easily available
documentation. As flights of fancy go, that's fertile turf that lends itself
easily to transmorgrifying, whereas, say, smashing Nahuatl and Azerbaijani
together might seem more like work (it would certainly take more effort and
research, as most US high schools I know of teach neither).
> e.g. let's take (Vulgar) Latin and apply the phonology of
> Tamil to it - et voilà, we have the lost language of the
> descendants of the Roman colony established on the cost of
> southern India ;)
And that could be a fun, fanciful language, and why not? I personally would
throw sutras, sand mandalas, and turmeric into the mix...
> What to call such conlangs. I agree 'bogolang' is not the
> best of terms;
If *only* because no one seems to definitively know how or why it's here. The
reasoning behind the term just doesn't have the traction the term itself seems
to have gotten. *I* originally thought it was the "buy-one-get-one" tag of a
certain shoe store chain in the States, which kind of does and doesn't make
sense simultaneously, but it's catchy. No? "Bogus" has been discussed enough,
certainly, but that's an *odd* turn of phrase to pick in a craft that could be
pejoratively monickered in its entirety as "bogus" by non-conlangers who don't
"get" it. No? I've also thought of "Beach Blanket Bongo", which would capture
the light-hearted fun of beach party films that bogolangs sometimes tap into.
Frankie and Annette -- Latin and Estonian, let's frug! No? People occasionally
point obliquely at places online one can go to see where the term originated,
but that's so far down on my list of things to do... So, no. Thus, it's the
lack of transparency that detracts for me, if anything, though I still like the
imagery of surfers, go-go boots, and Paul Lynde as it applies to conlanging.
> but xenophonic conlang is too much of a mouthful.
Too close to "xenophobic" and bereft of any whimsy whatsoever. Even "engelang"
at first hearing sounds like it might be fun.
"meldlang"? "pastichelang"? Call them "Louise" for all I care. "bogolang" may
be slightly unfortunate, but if that's the term, so be it.
Kou
Messages in this topic (71)
________________________________________________________________________
2.3. Re: Fiction & language families
Posted by: "Muke Tever" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2013 6:27 am ((PDT))
On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 01:38:02 -0600, R A Brown <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On 11/06/2013 02:07, Adam Walker wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 7:08 PM, Padraic Brown wrote:
>>
>>> --- On Mon, 6/10/13, Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
>>>
> [snip]
>
>>>> I have proposed "graftlang", but that hasn't caught
>>>> on yet.
>>>
>>> I think this term makes sense and will use that in
>>> preference to "bogolang".
>>>
>>>
>> I can't help thinking of graft as in bribery and official
>> corruption when I hear this term.
>
> :)
>
>> I'm supposing that the
>> intent is graft as in grafting trees or vines. But some
>> how I can't get my mind to want to go there.
>
> I guess that's one possible reason the term has not caught on. Also, of
> course, one is not grafting one _language_ on the root-stock of another
> language (as one might graft a tree or vine on the root-stock of
> another); one is merely applying the _phonology_ of one language to that
> of another (and there's more to language than phonology).
>
> It's an odd idea, and it seems (Vulgar) Latin is the language that
> generally undergoes this transmogrification: e.g. let's take (Vulgar)
> Latin and apply the phonology of Tamil to it - et voilà, we have the
> lost language of the descendants of the Roman colony established on the
> cost of southern India ;)
>
> What to call such conlangs. I agree 'bogolang' is not the best of
> terms; but xenophonic conlang is too much of a mouthful.
I have a sudden urge to start calling them "changelings", as though the
original infant language was stolen away and replaced it with a young
Latin (or whatever) to be raised in its place. ("Change-" also bringing
to mind the nigh-obligatory Grand Master Plan accompanying such projects.)
*Muke!
--
frath.net
Messages in this topic (71)
________________________________________________________________________
2.4. Re: Fiction & language families
Posted by: "R A Brown" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2013 7:23 am ((PDT))
On 11/06/2013 14:26, Muke Tever wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 01:38:02 -0600, R A Brown wrote:
[snip]
>> What to call such conlangs. I agree 'bogolang' is not
>> the best of terms; but xenophonic conlang is too much
>> of a mouthful.
>
> I have a sudden urge to start calling them
> "changelings", as though the original infant language was
> stolen away and replaced it with a young Latin (or
> whatever) to be raised in its place.
I like the idea - but I guess to let it live happily with
all the MONOSYLLABLE+lang terms, _changelang_ perhaps is
perhaps better.
> ("Change-" also bringing to mind the nigh-obligatory
> Grand Master Plan accompanying such projects.)
It certainly does. Yep, IMO changelang is so much better
than 'bogolang.'
--
Ray
==================================
http://www.carolandray.plus.com
==================================
"language ⦠began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
for individual beings and events."
[Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
Messages in this topic (71)
________________________________________________________________________
2.5. Re: Fiction & language families
Posted by: "Billy J.B." [email protected]
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2013 8:05 am ((PDT))
Changeling + -lang > changelinglang > linglang?
Hehehehe.
On Jun 11, 2013 4:23 PM, "R A Brown" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/06/2013 14:26, Muke Tever wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 11 Jun 2013 01:38:02 -0600, R A Brown wrote:
>>
> [snip]
>
> What to call such conlangs. I agree 'bogolang' is not
>>> the best of terms; but xenophonic conlang is too much
>>> of a mouthful.
>>>
>>
>> I have a sudden urge to start calling them
>> "changelings", as though the original infant language was
>> stolen away and replaced it with a young Latin (or
>> whatever) to be raised in its place.
>>
>
> I like the idea - but I guess to let it live happily with
> all the MONOSYLLABLE+lang terms, _changelang_ perhaps is
> perhaps better.
>
> ("Change-" also bringing to mind the nigh-obligatory
>> Grand Master Plan accompanying such projects.)
>>
>
> It certainly does. Yep, IMO changelang is so much better
> than 'bogolang.'
>
> --
> Ray
> ==============================**====
> http://www.carolandray.plus.**com <http://www.carolandray.plus.com>
> ==============================**====
> "language ⦠began with half-musical unanalysed expressions
> for individual beings and events."
> [Otto Jespersen, Progress in Language, 1895]
>
Messages in this topic (71)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Semi-phonemes?
Posted by: "And Rosta" [email protected]
Date: Tue Jun 11, 2013 7:30 am ((PDT))
On Jun 9, 2013 6:08 PM, "Matthew A. Gurevitch" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I have a question that I thought I saw answered here, but I could not
find with some quick searches in the archives. What does one call phonemes
that are only contrastive in certain contexts, but not contrastive in
others?
>
> For example, in my conlang, voicing is semi-contrastive, with the pairs
/p b/, /t d/, /k g/, /f v/, /s z/, /Ê Ê/, /x É£/, /ts dz/,/ÊÊ ÉÊ/, and /kx
gɣ/ being distinct word initially, in non-geminated intervocalic position,
and certain clusters, while syllable finally or geminated there is no
distinction between voicing.
>
> /pap/ and /bap/ are a minimal pair, but /pappap/ and /pabbab/ are seen
as variants of the same word (albeit seen as having a strange accent).
>
> Would you say that the voiced consonants are semi-phonemic, or
contrastive in certain environments, or something else entirely?
A conservative analysis would use archiphonemes: /paP, baP, apa, aba,
aPPa/. There are other possibilities. One is that there is a binary
contrast between a "basic" and an "elaborated" form, with the distribution
of the elaborated form restricted to certain phonotactic positions. A
variant of that would be to treat phonetic realization of the elaborated
form as a combined realization of the basic form on the one hand and of the
phonotactic position on the other.
The conservative analysis strikes me as unenterprising, but analyses that
improve on it would have to be justified on the basis of the facts of the
particular language.
--And.
Messages in this topic (13)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
