There are 15 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1.1. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
From: H. S. Teoh
1.2. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
From: Zach Wellstood
1.3. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
From: Padraic Brown
1.4. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
From: H. S. Teoh
1.5. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
From: Padraic Brown
1.6. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
From: Roman Rausch
2a. the symmetry of sound change
From: Matthew Boutilier
2b. Re: the symmetry of sound change
From: George Corley
2c. Re: the symmetry of sound change
From: Galen Buttitta
2d. Re: the symmetry of sound change
From: George Corley
2e. Re: the symmetry of sound change
From: Padraic Brown
2f. Re: the symmetry of sound change
From: Jyri Lehtinen
3a. Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
From: Douglas Koller
3b. Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
From: Douglas Koller
3c. Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
From: R A Brown
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1.1. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
Posted by: "H. S. Teoh" hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
Date: Fri Jun 21, 2013 4:45 pm ((PDT))
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:45:11AM -0700, Padraic Brown wrote:
> > From: H. S. Teoh <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx>
>
> >
> > I rather like Ebisédian's convention of what amounts to capitalizing
> > the _end_ of sentences, an influence which I plan to adopt in Tatari
> > Faran, which is also big in the department of marking the end rather
> > than the beginning.
>
> Oo, now that I like! Are they big on the endings of things in general?
> i'ld hazard the guess that they don't also use the equivalent of an
> endstoP what with there being a differentiated letterform to do the
> joB
yeaHtheYhavEworDfinaLcapitalizatioNsOtheYneeDnOinterworD
spaceSoRendstoPsincEtheYhavEAprominenTenDoFSentencEmar*K*
anDyeaHtheYbreaKlineSliterallYanywherEeveNiNthEmiddlEoFAw
or*D*
Well, that's Ebisédian for ya. :-P
Tatari Faran is a tad tamer, but they do have a penchant for
"end-marking". Postpositions, case clitics that terminate NPs, adverbs
that follow verbs, finalizers that terminate clauses, y'know, the works.
So it follows that their vertical writing, which is written
t
o
p
-
d
o
w
n,
would also be heavy on the
b
o
t
t
o
*M*
, and therefore more stable. :-P
> > I don't like word-medial capitalisation either, but I have to suffer
> > through it every day in my career: modern-day programming convention
> > is all about being camelCased, which I find
> > veryUglyAndTotallyJarring, and for which I totallyPlace
> > allOfTheBlame on Java. :-P
>
> Poor dear!
Yes I'm a poor ickle thing. :-P
> >> I also capitalise for emphasis.
> >
> > Really? I thought you usually áccented for èmphasis.
>
> The bloody Cheek. I can put Capitals if i bloody well Like to!
[...]
Wèll, Î shoǔld thínk sò!
T
--
Answer: Because it breaks the logical sequence of discussion.
> Question: Why is top posting bad?
Messages in this topic (48)
________________________________________________________________________
1.2. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
Posted by: "Zach Wellstood" zwellst...@gmail.com
Date: Fri Jun 21, 2013 5:10 pm ((PDT))
On Jun 21, 2013 10:48 PM, "Michael Everson" <ever...@evertype.com> wrote:
> > Absolutely all of łaá siri is written in a lowercase romanization
because for some reason I found that including uppercase letters is
extremely aesthetically displeasing.
>
> Why bother with it in English then?
Because in English it looks fine and in łaá siri I don't like how it
changes the complexion of the language. Their environments are different.
It's really just my personal preference.
Zach
Messages in this topic (48)
________________________________________________________________________
1.3. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Fri Jun 21, 2013 7:42 pm ((PDT))
> From: H. S. Teoh <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx>
>
>> > I rather like Ebisédian's convention of what amounts to
> capitalizing
>> > the _end_ of sentences, an influence which I plan to adopt in Tatari
>> > Faran, which is also big in the department of marking the end rather
>> > than the beginning.
>>
>> Oo, now that I like! Are they big on the endings of things in general?
>> i'ld hazard the guess that they don't also use the equivalent of an
>> endstoP what with there being a differentiated letterform to do the
>> joB
>
> yeaHtheYhavEworDfinaLcapitalizatioNsOtheYneeDnOinterworD
> spaceSoRendstoPsincEtheYhavEAprominenTenDoFSentencEmar*K*
> anDyeaHtheYbreaKlineSliterallYanywherEeveNiNthEmiddlEoFAw
> or*D*
>
> Well, that's Ebisédian for ya. :-P
Oh dearie me! That's mùch worse than I had at first feared! :P
I hope you realise how disconcerting that is! The eye naturally wants to
read that as "Hthe Yhav Ewor Dfina Lcapitalizatio Ns Othe Ynee..."
> Tatari Faran is a tad tamer, but they do have a penchant for
> "end-marking". Postpositions, case clitics that terminate NPs, adverbs
> that follow verbs, finalizers that terminate clauses, y'know, the works.
Interesting. Talarian is similarly end-oriented, but even so they like their
fancy initial letters/syllable-signs/glyphs.
>> Poor dear!
>
> Yes I'm a poor ickle thing. :-P
O/O==::c
[cue violins]
>> >> I also capitalise for emphasis.
>> >
>> > Really? I thought you usually áccented for èmphasis.
>>
>> The bloody Cheek. I can put Capitals if i bloody well Like to!
> [...]
>
> Wèll, Î shoǔld thínk sò!
℞íğĥţ! þàťş śòřţēď!
Padraic
> T
Messages in this topic (48)
________________________________________________________________________
1.4. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
Posted by: "H. S. Teoh" hst...@quickfur.ath.cx
Date: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:11 pm ((PDT))
On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 07:42:27PM -0700, Padraic Brown wrote:
> > From: H. S. Teoh <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx>
>
> >
> >> > I rather like Ebisédian's convention of what amounts to
> >> > capitalizing the _end_ of sentences, an influence which I plan
> >> > to adopt in Tatari Faran, which is also big in the department of
> >> > marking the end rather than the beginning.
> >>
> >> Oo, now that I like! Are they big on the endings of things in
> >> general? i'ld hazard the guess that they don't also use the
> >> equivalent of an endstoP what with there being a differentiated
> >> letterform to do the joB
> >
> > yeaHtheYhavEworDfinaLcapitalizatioNsOtheYneeDnOinterworD
> > spaceSoRendstoPsincEtheYhavEAprominenTenDoFSentencEmar*K*
> > anDyeaHtheYbreaKlineSliterallYanywherEeveNiNthEmiddlEoFAw
> > or*D*
> >
> > Well, that's Ebisédian for ya. :-P
>
> Oh dearie me! That's mùch worse than I had at first feared! :P
Yes, this ìs Ebisédian we're talking about. ;-) Now you know one of the
reasons (albeit only a rather minor one) I shelved it.
> I hope you realise how disconcerting that is! The eye naturally wants
> to read that as "Hthe Yhav Ewor Dfina Lcapitalizatio Ns Othe Ynee..."
It's camelCasing, subverted. Take that, Java! :-P :-P
> > Tatari Faran is a tad tamer, but they do have a penchant for
> > "end-marking". Postpositions, case clitics that terminate NPs,
> > adverbs that follow verbs, finalizers that terminate clauses,
> > y'know, the works.
>
> Interesting. Talarian is similarly end-oriented, but even so they like
> their fancy initial letters/syllable-signs/glyphs.
I've still yet to find enough time to sit down and work out TF's writing
system in full. Thanks to some recent discussion here on the list, I
think I've got the general mechanisms nailed down, but a system without
any concrete glyphs is râther difficult to use, one might say. Be that
as it may, I've decided that due to the inherently vertical nature of
the writing, instead of diacritics there will be left-critics and
right-critics (dextrocritics and aristerocritics, if you're into
aristocratic names), much like leaves on either side of a tree trunk.
Since it's an abugida-type system, the main (trunk) glyphs represent
consonants, and are very horizontal: very wide, and rather low, thus
amenable to vertical stacking. Word-final glyphs will probably be marked
with some kind of decoration, perhaps a ligature of some sort.
Clause-final glyphs will have either a more elaborate form of the glyph,
or use a kind of dedicated end-of-sentence glyph (most likely merged
into a ligature with the last consonant). Vowels and syllabic codas
will be marked with dextro-/aristero-critics of various forms.
I imagine these glyphs carved onto stripped tree trunks or painted on
pillars or doorposts, probably a single line of large writing per trunk,
maybe a few lines down a wall. I haven't decided how longer texts or
more practical texts would be written; maybe for more practical writings
they'd use charcoal on stone tablets or wooden pads (they haven't
invented paper yet). The writing painted on walls and pillars would be
more elaborate, of course, a direct descendent of the pictographs from
which TF writing recently emerged. The hand-written stuff would be
greatly simplified, but retain the more elaborate pictographs as
convenient variants for word- and clause-endings.
> >> Poor dear!
> >
> > Yes I'm a poor ickle thing. :-P
>
> O/O==::c
>
> [cue violins]
I prefer violas, they sound more melancholy. :-P
>
> >> >> I also capitalise for emphasis.
> >> >
> >> > Really? I thought you usually áccented for èmphasis.
> >>
> >> The bloody Cheek. I can put Capitals if i bloody well Like to!
> > [...]
> >
> > Wèll, Î shoǔld thínk sò!
>
> ℞íğĥţ! þàťş śòřţēď!
[...]
Whoa. Now rotate that 90° and stand it on its end, squash it a little
so the glyphs flatten out, and you'll get a rough idea of what Tatari
Faran writing might look like. :-P
T
--
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.
Messages in this topic (48)
________________________________________________________________________
1.5. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:23 am ((PDT))
> From: H. S. Teoh <hst...@quickfur.ath.cx>
>
> I've still yet to find enough time to sit down and work out TF's writing
> system in full. Thanks to some recent discussion here on the list, I
> think I've got the general mechanisms nailed down, but a system without
> any concrete glyphs is râther difficult to use, one might say.
Well, yes. But as they say, where there's a will, there's some jack as
wants to contest it. I've worked on the writing systems for a number of
conlangs, but rarely use the native script for anything other than decorative
work. The recent Conlang Christmas Card being a good example. But
even there, I've just finished entirely reworking the Avantimannish runes
from their most ancient to most modern forms, so that particular image
is now quite out of date. Oh well.
Talarian writing is so complex -- there's a couple different alphabets, a
syllabary, a large number of word-glyphs, left-over cuneiform modifiers,
plus when you're quoting certain kinds of people you've got to switch
to an entirely different language (which in turn has its own scripts and
writing conventions), and some things are written left to right, others are
done right to left and still others are top to bottom and some things have
to be written in red ink versus black or blue -- that I've just not bothered
to make more than one or two examples of native writing.
> Be that as it may, I've decided that due to the inherently vertical nature of
> the writing, instead of diacritics there will be left-critics and
> right-critics (dextrocritics and aristerocritics, if you're into
> aristocratic names), much like leaves on either side of a tree trunk.
> Since it's an abugida-type system, the main (trunk) glyphs represent
> consonants, and are very horizontal: very wide, and rather low, thus
> amenable to vertical stacking. Word-final glyphs will probably be marked
> with some kind of decoration, perhaps a ligature of some sort.
> Clause-final glyphs will have either a more elaborate form of the glyph,
> or use a kind of dedicated end-of-sentence glyph (most likely merged
> into a ligature with the last consonant). Vowels and syllabic codas
> will be marked with dextro-/aristero-critics of various forms.
>
> I imagine these glyphs carved onto stripped tree trunks or painted on
> pillars or doorposts, probably a single line of large writing per trunk,
> maybe a few lines down a wall. I haven't decided how longer texts or
> more practical texts would be written; maybe for more practical writings
> they'd use charcoal on stone tablets or wooden pads (they haven't
> invented paper yet). The writing painted on walls and pillars would be
> more elaborate, of course, a direct descendent of the pictographs from
> which TF writing recently emerged. The hand-written stuff would be
> greatly simplified, but retain the more elaborate pictographs as
> convenient variants for word- and clause-endings.
This sounds like it will be a lovely system indeed!
I can imagine a culture where it's door posts, rather than lintels, that take
center stage. Look at a standard Roman temple or church and it's always
the pediment or lintel that gets the monumental inscription. I could see a
TF analog having beautifully engraved monumental door posts that look
like trees but no lintel or pediment to speak of...
>> >> Poor dear!
>> >
>> > Yes I'm a poor ickle thing. :-P
>>
>> O/O==::c
>>
>> [cue violins]
>
> I prefer violas, they sound more melancholy. :-P
Pffp. Viólas, then! :/
O/O===::c
[cans violins, recues viólas]
>> ℞íğĥţ! þàťş śòřţēď!
>
> Whoa. Now rotate that 90° and stand it on its end, squash it a little
> so the glyphs flatten out, and you'll get a rough idea of what Tatari
> Faran writing might look like. :-P
:)
Padraic
Messages in this topic (48)
________________________________________________________________________
1.6. Re: writing (almost) entirely in lower-case letters
Posted by: "Roman Rausch" ara...@mail.ru
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 6:22 am ((PDT))
>I don't like word-medial capitalisation either, but I have to suffer
>through it every day in my career: modern-day programming convention is
>all about being camelCased, which I find veryUglyAndTotallyJarring, and
>for which I totallyPlace allOfTheBlame on Java. :-P
In my own code, I prefer a differentiated approach where I make noun phrases
camel-cased, but separate objects of verbs with an underscore, for example
ArraySorter, but sort_array. I don't know whether this already exists as a
convention somewhere, but I find this the most readable choice.
Messages in this topic (48)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2a. the symmetry of sound change
Posted by: "Matthew Boutilier" bvticvlar...@gmail.com
Date: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:40 pm ((PDT))
in my diachronic conlanging, i'm usually pretty good about sound changes
being somewhat categorical: if one uvular consonant becomes velar, i will
often arrange it so that they *all* do. it gives me a warm and fuzzy sense
of accomplishment.
but right now i've got three sibilants, all voiceless:
1. an alveolar /s/
2. a lateral alveolar /K/
3. a post-alveolar /S/
and i definitely want at least /s/ to undergo *voicing* word-initially and
intervocalically when non-geminate (as many Continental West Germanic
dialects).
but i'm not so sure i want /K/ and /S/ to follow suit, mainly since [K\]
sounds a hell of a lot like [l], which i have (which itself devoices to [K]
word-finally!), and because /Z/ is one of my least favorite phonemes.
how weird would it be for *only* the /s/ to undergo voicing?
i know, i know. in German, /s/ voices and /S/ does not. but there's all
that voodoo of /S/ originating as a cluster *sk which i think complicates
things, so i'd rather not use this as a serious natlang precedent (which i
guess is what i'm looking for).
thoughts?
matt
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
2b. Re: the symmetry of sound change
Posted by: "George Corley" gacor...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:08 am ((PDT))
Isn't /s/ usually considered [+strident]. That should isolate it from the
others.
Of course, natlang precedent would certainly be more valuable than
theoretical points. Unfortunately, I can't think of one at the moment.
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Matthew Boutilier
<bvticvlar...@gmail.com>wrote:
> in my diachronic conlanging, i'm usually pretty good about sound changes
> being somewhat categorical: if one uvular consonant becomes velar, i will
> often arrange it so that they *all* do. it gives me a warm and fuzzy sense
> of accomplishment.
>
> but right now i've got three sibilants, all voiceless:
> 1. an alveolar /s/
> 2. a lateral alveolar /K/
> 3. a post-alveolar /S/
> and i definitely want at least /s/ to undergo *voicing* word-initially and
> intervocalically when non-geminate (as many Continental West Germanic
> dialects).
>
> but i'm not so sure i want /K/ and /S/ to follow suit, mainly since [K\]
> sounds a hell of a lot like [l], which i have (which itself devoices to [K]
> word-finally!), and because /Z/ is one of my least favorite phonemes.
>
> how weird would it be for *only* the /s/ to undergo voicing?
>
> i know, i know. in German, /s/ voices and /S/ does not. but there's all
> that voodoo of /S/ originating as a cluster *sk which i think complicates
> things, so i'd rather not use this as a serious natlang precedent (which i
> guess is what i'm looking for).
>
> thoughts?
>
> matt
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
2c. Re: the symmetry of sound change
Posted by: "Galen Buttitta" satorarepotenetoperarot...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 12:22 am ((PDT))
According to my Phonology class workbook, /S/ is [+strident]. /K/ is
[-strident].
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 3:08 AM, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Isn't /s/ usually considered [+strident]. That should isolate it from the
> others.
>
> Of course, natlang precedent would certainly be more valuable than
> theoretical points. Unfortunately, I can't think of one at the moment.
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Matthew Boutilier
> <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > in my diachronic conlanging, i'm usually pretty good about sound changes
> > being somewhat categorical: if one uvular consonant becomes velar, i will
> > often arrange it so that they *all* do. it gives me a warm and fuzzy
> sense
> > of accomplishment.
> >
> > but right now i've got three sibilants, all voiceless:
> > 1. an alveolar /s/
> > 2. a lateral alveolar /K/
> > 3. a post-alveolar /S/
> > and i definitely want at least /s/ to undergo *voicing* word-initially
> and
> > intervocalically when non-geminate (as many Continental West Germanic
> > dialects).
> >
> > but i'm not so sure i want /K/ and /S/ to follow suit, mainly since [K\]
> > sounds a hell of a lot like [l], which i have (which itself devoices to
> [K]
> > word-finally!), and because /Z/ is one of my least favorite phonemes.
> >
> > how weird would it be for *only* the /s/ to undergo voicing?
> >
> > i know, i know. in German, /s/ voices and /S/ does not. but there's all
> > that voodoo of /S/ originating as a cluster *sk which i think complicates
> > things, so i'd rather not use this as a serious natlang precedent (which
> i
> > guess is what i'm looking for).
> >
> > thoughts?
> >
> > matt
> >
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
2d. Re: the symmetry of sound change
Posted by: "George Corley" gacor...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:00 am ((PDT))
Hmm, it looks like you're right. Ah well. In any case /s/ by itself is a
natural class, so it's theoretically possible for it to have a sound change
that no other sound has. But it seems a little odd to me that it would be
affected and other sibilants wouldn't.
On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Galen Buttitta <
satorarepotenetoperarot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> According to my Phonology class workbook, /S/ is [+strident]. /K/ is
> [-strident].
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 3:08 AM, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Isn't /s/ usually considered [+strident]. That should isolate it from the
> > others.
> >
> > Of course, natlang precedent would certainly be more valuable than
> > theoretical points. Unfortunately, I can't think of one at the moment.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Matthew Boutilier
> > <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>wrote:
> >
> > > in my diachronic conlanging, i'm usually pretty good about sound
> changes
> > > being somewhat categorical: if one uvular consonant becomes velar, i
> will
> > > often arrange it so that they *all* do. it gives me a warm and fuzzy
> > sense
> > > of accomplishment.
> > >
> > > but right now i've got three sibilants, all voiceless:
> > > 1. an alveolar /s/
> > > 2. a lateral alveolar /K/
> > > 3. a post-alveolar /S/
> > > and i definitely want at least /s/ to undergo *voicing* word-initially
> > and
> > > intervocalically when non-geminate (as many Continental West Germanic
> > > dialects).
> > >
> > > but i'm not so sure i want /K/ and /S/ to follow suit, mainly since
> [K\]
> > > sounds a hell of a lot like [l], which i have (which itself devoices to
> > [K]
> > > word-finally!), and because /Z/ is one of my least favorite phonemes.
> > >
> > > how weird would it be for *only* the /s/ to undergo voicing?
> > >
> > > i know, i know. in German, /s/ voices and /S/ does not. but there's all
> > > that voodoo of /S/ originating as a cluster *sk which i think
> complicates
> > > things, so i'd rather not use this as a serious natlang precedent
> (which
> > i
> > > guess is what i'm looking for).
> > >
> > > thoughts?
> > >
> > > matt
> > >
> >
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
2e. Re: the symmetry of sound change
Posted by: "Padraic Brown" elemti...@yahoo.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:06 am ((PDT))
> From: George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com>
>
> Hmm, it looks like you're right. Ah well. In any case /s/ by itself is a
> natural class, so it's theoretically possible for it to have a sound change
> that no other sound has. But it seems a little odd to me that it would be
> affected and other sibilants wouldn't.
Well, then it's a perfect time for a little in mediis conlanging. If you want
v.l. sibilants to become voiced, are okay with /s/ doing so but also are
not so fond of /K/ and /S/ doing so, just set your temporal quandoquecator
for some unspecified time after the series of changes has started (with /s/)
but hasn't fully or even yet affected the other sounds. It's not like the whole
English nation woke up one morning and, looking at their calendars, said
"oh bosh! Twenty second June, so today's the day we're all supposed to
switch over to the glo''al stop!" Change is gradual and there's no reason
a conlanger can't work on his conlang mid shift!
Padraic
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Galen Buttitta <
> satorarepotenetoperarot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> According to my Phonology class workbook, /S/ is [+strident]. /K/ is
>> [-strident].
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 3:08 AM, George Corley <gacor...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> > Isn't /s/ usually considered [+strident]. That should isolate it
> from the
>> > others.
>> >
>> > Of course, natlang precedent would certainly be more valuable than
>> > theoretical points. Unfortunately, I can't think of one at the
> moment.
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Matthew Boutilier
>> > <bvticvlar...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> > > in my diachronic conlanging, i'm usually pretty good about
> sound
>> changes
>> > > being somewhat categorical: if one uvular consonant becomes
> velar, i
>> will
>> > > often arrange it so that they *all* do. it gives me a warm and
> fuzzy
>> > sense
>> > > of accomplishment.
>> > >
>> > > but right now i've got three sibilants, all voiceless:
>> > > 1. an alveolar /s/
>> > > 2. a lateral alveolar /K/
>> > > 3. a post-alveolar /S/
>> > > and i definitely want at least /s/ to undergo *voicing*
> word-initially
>> > and
>> > > intervocalically when non-geminate (as many Continental West
> Germanic
>> > > dialects).
>> > >
>> > > but i'm not so sure i want /K/ and /S/ to follow suit, mainly
> since
>> [K\]
>> > > sounds a hell of a lot like [l], which i have (which itself
> devoices to
>> > [K]
>> > > word-finally!), and because /Z/ is one of my least favorite
> phonemes.
>> > >
>> > > how weird would it be for *only* the /s/ to undergo voicing?
>> > >
>> > > i know, i know. in German, /s/ voices and /S/ does not. but
> there's all
>> > > that voodoo of /S/ originating as a cluster *sk which i think
>> complicates
>> > > things, so i'd rather not use this as a serious natlang
> precedent
>> (which
>> > i
>> > > guess is what i'm looking for).
>> > >
>> > > thoughts?
>> > >
>> > > matt
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
2f. Re: the symmetry of sound change
Posted by: "Jyri Lehtinen" lehtinen.j...@gmail.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 4:34 am ((PDT))
You are right that it's not easy to justify voicing /s/ but not /ʃ/ and /ɬ/
unless you assume some extra twists to make /s/ more distinct from the rest
two. Then again it might not be such a huge crime to have no clear reason
at all for the change to only affect /s/, at least if your sense of
aesthetics allows that.
but i'm not so sure i want /K/ and /S/ to follow suit, mainly since [K\]
> sounds a hell of a lot like [l], which i have (which itself devoices to [K]
> word-finally!), and because /Z/ is one of my least favorite phonemes.
>
It might be a bit easier to justify leaving the lateral fricative outside
the voicing but let the voicing affect both /s/ and /ʃ/. You can easily get
rid of the nasty /ʒ/ by leniting it quickly into /j/. This is an
interesting change because if you would decide to apply a similar voicing
process for the lateral fricative as well you'd likely get something like /ɬ/
> /ɮ/ > /l/. With what you describe, this would lead you to have either [l]
and [ɬ] as allophones of a single lateral consonant or only marginally
distinct phonemes. Especially the route of two marginally distinct phonemes
would be nice to see experimented in some dialect of a parallel closely
related language.
-Jyri
Messages in this topic (6)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" douglaskol...@hotmail.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:02 am ((PDT))
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:06:13 -0300
> From: leolucas1...@gmail.com
> Subject: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> How do you express the concept of emphatic "even" in your conlangs? Do
> you use any natlangs as inspiration?
> Ecce some examples of the kind of usage I mean:
> "I, even I, am he that comforteth you: who art thou [...]"
> http://biblehub.com/isaiah/51-12.htm
I don't know if this particular example took you away from where you originally
wanted to go, but...
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 12:16:46 -0400
> From: danny.c.bow...@gmail.com
> I believe that your two usages are slightly different. I read the quote
> from Isaiah as saying: I am the *only *one who comforts you.
The Chinese runs with that interpretation: 惟 有 我 ， 是 安 慰 你 们 的 "There is only
me who..."
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 19:35:00 +0100
> From: r...@carolandray.plus.com
> Interestingly, there is _no_ word in the Hebrew
> corresponding to "even" of the King James version (and
> several other, but not all, English versions):
> http://interlinearbible.org/isaiah/51-12.htm
For that matter, I don't see a word for "you" anywhere in the Hebrew gloss,
either. It looks like every other language took the σε or vos and went to town
with it.
> I thought I'd check other ancient versions. The Septuagint has:
> ἐγώ εἰμι ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ παρακαλῶν σε ...
> I am I am the [one] comforting you ...
> Once again no word corresponding to "even." :)
> The Clementine version of the Vulgate has:
> Ego, ego ipse consolabor vos.
> I, I myself will-comfort you.
> I guess the 'ipse' (-self) sort of corresponds to the
> English "even." _ego ipse_ is rather like "moi-même" in French.
> The new version of the Vulgate has:
> Ego, ego ipse consolator vester.
> I I myself [am] comforter your.
> Therefore I would have:
> ἐμέ ἔς ἐμέ ὅ παρακάλει σέ ...
> I am I who comforts you ... Lest anyone have forgotten, σέ (read [si]) is
> the Géarthnuns word for "I". ;)
> In other words, in those two languages there is nothing
> corresponding to the English "even" - we are just saying "I
> am I who ..."
For "I, I am He who comforts.", Géarthnuns would probably run with, "Sí, sí gü
seth, cheth la uth sho, nöi." ("gü", the auxiliary in the emphatic transcendent
kind of has a "so put *that* in your pipe and smoke it" feel to it. -- Guys,
I'm GOD already!! Haven't we nailed that down yet?!) For the following uses of
"even": Even a child knows that.He was so moved that he even cried.Even the dog
won't eat it.He wouldn't even say hello to me.
Géarthnuns has four patterns, two loosely based on the Chinese "連...也/都..."
(lian2...ye3/dou1...) strategy. It's *nice* to have something resumptive down
at the end by the SOV verb now and again.
> As for the other meaning of "even" - I'll leave that for the
> moment.
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:06:13 -0300
> From: leolucas1...@gmail.com
> "I was strong before; but now I am even stronger."
> http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/even
And yet another word, another pattern in Géarthnuns.
Kou
Messages in this topic (17)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
Posted by: "Douglas Koller" douglaskol...@hotmail.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 1:21 am ((PDT))
> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:49:29 -0300
> From: leolucas1...@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
> To: conl...@listserv.brown.edu
> "Mesmo chovendo, ele foi à festa." (Even raining, he went to the party.)
He rains a lot, does he? :D
Kou
Messages in this topic (17)
________________________________________________________________________
3c. Re: Emphatic "even" in nat and conlangs.
Posted by: "R A Brown" r...@carolandray.plus.com
Date: Sat Jun 22, 2013 2:35 am ((PDT))
On 21/06/2013 20:44, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 07:35:00PM +0100, R A Brown
> wrote:
>> On 21/06/2013 17:16, Daniel Bowman wrote:
[snip]
>> Interestingly, there is _no_ word in the Hebrew
>> corresponding to "even" of the King James version (and
>> several other, but not all, English versions):
>> http://interlinearbible.org/isaiah/51-12.htm
>
> Now *that's* interesting!! I was just wondering exactly
> the same thing -- what does the Hebrew say? It's
> interesting that the pronoun is just repeated!
Yes.
> In that sense, it's not really a mirative as the English
> would suggest, but IMO more of directing the attention
> of the audience towards oneself, or emphasis on oneself.
I thinks so.
>> I thought I'd check other ancient versions. The
>> Septuagint has: ἐγώ εἰμι ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ παρακαλῶν σε ... I
>> am I am the [one] comforting you ...
>>
>> Once again no word corresponding to "even." :)
>
> That's curious, though. What does the repeated "I am"
> signify in the Greek?
My guess is that the translators found simply repeating ἐγώ
(egṓ) simply "un-Greek" (ἐγὼ ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ παρακαλῶν ..). ἐγώ
needs a verb, so I guess they found repeating subject and
verb more acceptable. it has IMO the same effect: it
directs attention to the subject - "I am, _I am_ the one
comforts ...)
[snip]
>>
>> The use of "even" in the various English versions
>> seems to be to emphasize "I" which is simply repeated
>> in the Hebrew version. One could have, I guess: "I,
>> 'tis I, who comforts you ..."
>
> I think I like "I, 'tis I" better, in the sense of
> closer correspondence with the original language.
I think so, but I guess too colloquial (at that time) for
the KJV translators.
[snip]
>>
>> In other words, in those two languages there is nothing
>> corresponding to the English "even" - we are just
>> saying "I am I who ..."
>
> This is utterly fascinating. Why is it "I am I who ...
> " rather than "I am he who ..."?
Because "he" is specifically third person and I think in
these two languages (TAKE & Outidic) the first person
subject would attract the antecedent of the relative to
first person as well.
--
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 (17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
conlang-nor...@yahoogroups.com
conlang-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
conlang-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
