Conlang fluency thread

[masako]

muyanatinko te tolokin ma kistuaton ipampa pa ta sahya
The creation myth of Tolkien and Christianity differs greatly, even though you are correct.

ya koya
My apologies.

[bradrn]

Ŋay nii daw
It’s fine

[masako]

ehe nye itla eta 'naka nokua muyaye' te 'kua'ota' omomya ka
However, why does "She created all that ever existed." make you think of "Eru Ilúvatar (All-father)"?

[bradrn]

ehe nye itla eta 'naka nokua muyaye' te 'kua'ota' omomya ka
However, why does "She created all that ever existed." make you think of "Eru Ilúvatar (All-father)"?

Um, because I didn’t notice the pronouns?

(I’m feeling a bit too tired to translate anything more complex than ‘It’s fine’ right now… I think it’s probably time for me to go! )

[masako]

onyo unyan muya
Study makes for understanding.

[jal]

I read LotR so long ago that I can barely even remember much of the plot.)

"Loh a dem ring" tel bo pahti a man-dem, dwohf an elf pon johni fi banis magik ring, pwaya bat majik man kac im.
"Lord of the rings" is about a group of men, a dwarf and an elf on a journey to make a magic ring disappear, before an evil wizzard gets it.


JAL

[quinterbeck]

onyo unyan muya
Study makes for understanding.

Yoer mo hou urimu nu eumgi
The way to understanding goes through confusion

[masako]

onyo unyan muya
Study makes for understanding.

Yoer mo hou urimu nu eumgi
The way to understanding goes through confusion

teyelon namyo tananke
Our statements do not conflict.

[bradrn]

I read LotR so long ago that I can barely even remember much of the plot.)

"Loh a dem ring" tel bo pahti a man-dem, dwohf an elf pon johni fi banis magik ring, pwaya bat majik man kac im.
"Lord of the rings" is about a group of men, a dwarf and an elf on a journey to make a magic ring disappear, before an evil wizzard gets it.


JAL

Tsek nii besiwe lheybuq!
/t͡səʔ niː bəˈsiwə ˈɬəjbuʔ/
that.VIS FOC 1s=have knowledge

That much I know!

[masako]

to na kuayomayemua enahue pakon mulapa ka
manner 1s all-day-PST-COM P.1s-LOC new.thing-ACC begin-POT Q
“How can I begin anything new with all of yesterday in me?”

[quinterbeck]

teyelon namyo tananke
Our statements do not conflict.

Mou n'adado gei?? Don don don!!
Or do they?? Dun dun dun!!

More: show

I wasn't disagreeing, I just wanted to try expressing a similar idea

[masako]

netla unyaye
I understood that.

[masako]

mo tlokua ka
Where is everyone?

[bradrn]

Tsek nii ŋande daw tuq! Ŋiimu tshaaliŋu waalhiŋu…
/t͡sək niː ˈŋandə daw tuʔ || ˈŋiːmu ˈt͡sʰaːliŋu ˈwaːɬiŋu/
that.VIS COP question good very! 3p=PST leave-PFV-TEL go-PFV-TEL

That is a very good question! They have all disappeared…

[KathTheDragon]

Iyeyu im, tak nuwan neti uwanyo iś motiśen
HAB=1S here | IND=nothing-PL SR SBJV-desire\PFV-1S=SR say\INF-SG.N-3P
I'm here, but there's nothing I want to say.

[xxx]

zafou
ouuom
uuduu

obscured(by the)understanding(of the)language
lost in my language ideas...

[bradrn]

Iyeyu im, tak nuwan neti uwanyo iś motiśen
HAB=1S here | IND=nothing-PL SR SBJV-desire\PFV-1S=SR say\INF-SG.N-3P
I'm here, but there's nothing I want to say.

‘Qiye’ kheliithikh thaŋ mbesii ‘yu’, ‘tak=’ thaŋ mbesii ‘nuwan’ thaŋ maag, ‘=ilh’ thaŋ mbesii ‘quwanyu’ thaŋ… Ŋay ngii fugun!!
/ˈʔijə kʰəˈliːtʰikʰ tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ju | tak tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ˈnuwan maːɣ | (ʔ)iɬ tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ˈʔuwanju tʰaŋ || ŋaj ᵑɡiː ˈfuɣun/
‘iye’ clitic DEF.SG merge ‘yu’, ‘tak=’ DEF.SG merge ‘nuwan’ DEF.SG NEG, ‘=iś’ DEF.SG merge ‘uwanyo’ DEF.SG… 3s COP.NEG sense

The clitic ‘iye=’ is written together with ‘yu’, but ‘tak=’ isn’t merged with ‘nuwan’, and ‘=iś’ isn’t merged with ‘uwanyo’… It makes no sense!!

[KathTheDragon]

‘Qiye’ kheliithikh thaŋ mbesii ‘yu’, ‘tak=’ thaŋ mbesii ‘nuwan’ thaŋ maag, ‘=ilh’ thaŋ mbesii ‘quwanyu’ thaŋ… Ŋay ngii fugun!!
/ˈʔijə kʰəˈliːtʰikʰ tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ju | tak tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ˈnuwan maːɣ | (ʔ)iɬ tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ˈʔuwanju tʰaŋ || ŋaj ᵑɡiː ˈfuɣun/
‘iye’ clitic DEF.SG merge ‘yu’, ‘tak=’ DEF.SG merge ‘nuwan’ DEF.SG NEG, ‘=iś’ DEF.SG merge ‘uwanyo’ DEF.SG… 3s COP.NEG sense

The clitic ‘iye=’ is written together with ‘yu’, but ‘tak=’ isn’t merged with ‘nuwan’, and ‘=iś’ isn’t merged with ‘uwanyo’… It makes no sense!!

Lammaḫ te
sip\IPFV-3S.C tea
*sips tea*

It actually makes perfect sense - iyeyu is iye-u with a transitional y (for reasons) between the clitic and the normal suffix form of the 1S pronoun, which is required after iye (for reasons).

[bradrn]

‘Qiye’ kheliithikh thaŋ mbesii ‘yu’, ‘tak=’ thaŋ mbesii ‘nuwan’ thaŋ maag, ‘=ilh’ thaŋ mbesii ‘quwanyu’ thaŋ… Ŋay ngii fugun!!
/ˈʔijə kʰəˈliːtʰikʰ tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ju | tak tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ˈnuwan maːɣ | (ʔ)iɬ tʰaŋ ᵐbəˈsiː ˈʔuwanju tʰaŋ || ŋaj ᵑɡiː ˈfuɣun/
‘iye’ clitic DEF.SG merge ‘yu’, ‘tak=’ DEF.SG merge ‘nuwan’ DEF.SG NEG, ‘=iś’ DEF.SG merge ‘uwanyo’ DEF.SG… 3s COP.NEG sense

The clitic ‘iye=’ is written together with ‘yu’, but ‘tak=’ isn’t merged with ‘nuwan’, and ‘=iś’ isn’t merged with ‘uwanyo’… It makes no sense!!

Lammaḫ te
sip\IPFV-3S.C tea
*sips tea*

It actually makes perfect sense - iyeyu is iye-u with a transitional y (for reasons) between the clitic and the normal suffix form of the 1S pronoun, which is required after iye (for reasons).

But then why don’t you write the other clitics together? In other words, I’m wondering why you don’t do this:

Iyeyu im, taknuwan neti uwanyoiś motiśen

And instead do this:

Iyeyu im, tak nuwan neti uwanyo iś motiśen

[masako]

uakalamya hayo...
That language is hers,,,

eya ueninek
Maybe you shouldn't critique