Zompist Bboard Again

panda bear: bamboo eater.

next: primates (you decide if this includes or excludes human).

There are plenty of animals that, in non-English languages, are named without referring to another animal, but that might refer to another animal in English. I don't see why their English names should be privileged above their names in other languages. As long as you don't make it the same thing as...

I think we should not accept an animal name that in the English language already has no reference to another animal. ...you might have to run that one by me again. I mean something like "sugar glider": In English, the animal is referred as a compound of sugar and glider, neither of them r...

I think we should not accept an animal name that in the English language already has no reference to another animal.

I don't think it's reasonable to call it "the word final allophone of /n/" Phoneme labels are arbitrary, however. We could denote Japanese's nasal phoneme as /👃/, for example. It's merely convention that phoneme labels are similar to their primary allophone(s). Thanks for the idea for my ...

I wonder why do you consider the first person and the second person as a noun class?

/☕/, /⚽/, /☎/, /☯/ No, I mean, I saw "a cup of coffee", "soccer ball", "rotary telephone", and "ying-yang" as the phoneme inventory of the Marshallese Yes, that's the point . Phoneme notation is kinda arbitrary: when there is little allophony, you may as well...

Are you thinking about the infamous Hale (2000) paper that analyzed Marshallese with four vowel phonemes /☕/, /⚽/, /☎/, /☯/? Is that even a phoneme? Well, it makes about as much sense as any other analysis of Marshallese vowels. From the No, I mean, I saw "hot beverage", "soccer ball...

For Indonesian, after I read the paper, is probably the only language with Indonesian-type voice system, the rest of the language in western Indonesia uses Sundic-type voice system. (I think Indonesian-type voice system is actually saner than Sundic-type, so this might be a good idea for if natlang ...

Ryusenshi wrote: ↑Mon Sep 23, 2019 12:26 am Are you thinking about the infamous Hale (2000) paper that analyzed Marshallese with four vowel phonemes //, //, /☎/, /☯/?

Is that even a phoneme?

English verbal conjugation is far more bizarre: I don't know of any other language where verbal agreement is limited to one person/number combination out of six and appears only in a single tense (everywhere but the copula, that is). Trumai , for the limitation to one person/number combination. Alt...

Shilha, how are human supposed to distinguish the pronunciation between: i-fri and y-fri?

I've been thinking whether I should have participles or not in a conlang. What do other languages do if they lack participles? The finite form of the verb, together with relativization. Some participles are used as converb, so the translation is finite form of the verb with conjunction (null conjun...

is this realistic:

y > ø

Unconditionally. (While yː > iː)

bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2019 5:54 am

Xwtek wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2019 5:31 am The latter, although sounds weird, it's attested in proto-Indo-Aryan. Don't know about the latter.

Is one of those ‘latter’s supposed to be ‘former’?

According to Index Diachronica, the /ʃ/ > /ʂ/ one. The one that I don't know is the [ɹ̠̊˔], or [ɻ̊˔] one.

None of these seems too plausible to me except {ʃ,ç}→/ɕ/. Why? Well, /ʃ/ and /ç/ are both palatal sounds, so I can’t imagine them merging to a non-palatal sound. (I could be wrong though; maybe better ask in the Sound Change Quickie Thread .) Actually, I think {ʃ,ç}→/ʂ/ is realistic too. You just h...

swimming iguana = crawler-swimmer.
(In the same language, the word for an iguana is land swimming iguana.)

Next: silk worm.

bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Sep 14, 2019 2:26 am (BTW, are you the same person formerly known as Akangka?)

Yes.

Is it realistic to have /q/ > /k/ if you have a pharyngeal consonant?

I can't read french .