Twin Aster

[bradrn]

I am pleased to finally be able to announce that I’m scheduled to give a presentation at LCC 11 about the Caber logograms.

Wonderful!

[Man in Space]

I am pleased to finally be able to announce that I’m scheduled to give a presentation at LCC 11 about the Caber logograms.

Wonderful!

Thank you!

---

The 1500º Caber logogram: ŭnec 'there was/were no(t)'.

[keenir]

I am pleased to finally be able to announce that I’m scheduled to give a presentation at LCC 11 about the Caber logograms.

thats excellent news; kudos

[Man in Space]

I am pleased to finally be able to announce that I’m scheduled to give a presentation at LCC 11 about the Caber logograms.

thats excellent news; kudos

Thank you!

---

One glyph, 3 readings.

1. mvŭnj 'formal reception, audience, levee, tour'
2. mvŭnc 'pathogenic fungus, yeast (infection), fungal infection'
3. mvŭrgdi 'to live long, to prosper'

The original reading was mvŭnj. The readings mvŭnc and mvŭrgdi were acquired by phonetic punning.

[Raphael]

One glyph, 3 readings.

1. mvŭnj 'formal reception, audience, levee, tour'
2. mvŭnc 'pathogenic fungus, yeast (infection), fungal infection'
3. mvŭrgdi 'to live long, to prosper'

The original reading was mvŭnj. The readings mvŭnc and mvŭrgdi were acquired by phonetic punning.

Its physical design seems to be based on the first reading.

[bradrn]

1. mvŭnj 'formal reception, audience, levee, tour'
2. mvŭnc 'pathogenic fungus, yeast (infection), fungal infection'
3. mvŭrgdi 'to live long, to prosper'

The original reading was mvŭnj. The readings mvŭnc and mvŭrgdi were acquired by phonetic punning.

Is there no semantic determinative to disambiguate? Meaning #3, for instance, could be disambiguated with a Vulcan salute.

[Man in Space]

1. mvŭnj 'formal reception, audience, levee, tour'
2. mvŭnc 'pathogenic fungus, yeast (infection), fungal infection'
3. mvŭrgdi 'to live long, to prosper'

The original reading was mvŭnj. The readings mvŭnc and mvŭrgdi were acquired by phonetic punning.

Is there no semantic determinative to disambiguate? Meaning #3, for instance, could be disambiguated with a Vulcan salute.

Full semantic determinatives in CC are rare. The common use case is for the 3SG.F which uses the sign for SOQUR 'woman' to disambiguate.

---

This—with a background to make it easier on the eyes—is the reçuqu (lit. 'the way to weave [things]'), the grid against which the qanvanc ('glyphs, characters') are described. As to how to classify and describe strokes, let's add some flavor:



So what does this all mean?

• At first blush, the grid is divided into four quadrants called magovedoc (ma- INTENSIFIER + ogoved 'season' + -oc PLURAL):
  • At lower left is vih 'spring' (as in the season).
  • Above it, at upper left, is pŏrov 'summer'.
  • At lower right, qom 'autumn, fall'.
  • At upper right, we have jasin 'winter'.
• The big red dots are the oestoc ('big, large, greater, major') cŭjroc (sg. cŭjre), from cŭj 'to face, to orient towards' + -re). These have individual names:
  1. At bottom-left is the gidemre (< gidem 'to found, to establish, to start s.t. + -re).
  2. Middle-left is the rgax 'groundhog'.
  3. The top-left dot is called the bagamegi 'kite, pennant, standard, flag, wind sock'.
  4. At bottom-center we have the fŏas 'pebble'.
  5. The central dot is the rdŭn 'eye, hook, catch'.
  6. At top of center we have the qvup 'bird sp.'.
  7. The bottom-right is the ŏp 'foot'.
  8. At mid-right, you've got the acoŏ 'monkey'.
  9. The top-right dot is called the giar 'cliff, edge'.
• The mauve dots that look the color of my Aunt Jeannie's old luggage set are the tinc ('small, lesser, minor') cŭjroc. These too have names:
  1. At lower left is the fevih 'spring' (as in the season).
  2. Above it, at upper left, is the fepŏrov 'summer'.
  3. At lower right, the feqom 'autumn, fall'.
  4. At upper right, we have the fejasin 'winter'.
• The thick black lines are the niqi 'spine' (vertical) and qen 'tongue' (horizontal). The lower spine and the left tongue are considered baçax (baç 'near, proximally' + -ax ADJECTIVIZER) 'near(by)', with the upper spine and right tongue being considered hos 'far(away)'.
• The thick white lines are the ŭsbveqa (sg. ŭsbvec) 'jaws' and the ŏcŭaqa (sg. ŏcŭac) 'palms of the hands'. These get associated to their grid quadrant—e.g. qomax ŭsbvec for the right side of the lower edge, jasinax ŏcŭac for the upper portion of the right edge.
• Points not covered by the above are given with relation to the named component to which they are associated, using the following qualifiers:
  • cŭp '(to the) left'
  • ucçŏ 'above, on'
  • aqir '(to the) right'
  • ŭqan 'under, below'
  When you compound these, the vertical component comes first: ŭqancŭp 'below and to the left'.
• The ranks are divided into the horizontal oesnotoc (sg. oesnots) 'logs' and vertical rŏoc (sg. rŏa) 'tree-trunks'. These words came to mean 'row' and 'column', respectively, in many of the daughter languages.

When dealing with stroke order, standard practice is to start with the gidemre (i.e., at lower left), then go up vertically along the rŏa, then move to the next column on the oesnots, repeat, repeat. CC stroke directions are simple: There are no curves, and wth only a few exceptions (which I will get to later), they refuse to ascend vertically and refuse go left. You start with the first stroke you encounter on a given rŏa; in case you have multiple strokes starting at the same point, the one with the lowest terminus takes priority.

Take, for instance, the glyph gvaç:



With the reçuqu, stroke directions, and stroke order indicated:



The strokes would be described thus:

1. Ucço rgax, ŭqan rgax
2. Rgax, cŭp rdun
3. Ucçoqir rgax, ŭqanqir rgax
4. Ucço baçax qen, ŭqan baçax qen
5. Ucço qup rdun, ŭqancŭp rdun
6. Fŏas, ucço qomax ŭsbveqa, ŏp
7. Rdun, hos qen
8. Ŭqan qvup, fejasin, ucço qomax ŭsbveqa
9. Ŭqan qvup, jasinax ŭsbveqa

[bradrn]

Something that’s been bothering me a bit throughout this: without actually having the template there, is it humanly possible to follow such a strict and dense arrangement of points? If it was a simple grid I would be less sceptical, but it’s not — it’s several slightly different grids together, sometimes with distinct points very close to each other indeed.

[Man in Space]

I had occasion to read TomHChappell's earlier comment on the Caber logograms and it made me take a trip down memory lane [read: read this thread] this afternoon. I realized that I haven't done much with the trivoc since I first posted about it. Tom commented there, too, and I had some time today to think further about this.

Brief recap:

Since the rest of the phonetics are backwards let's start with the vowels this time. At "base", the vowel inventory is as follows:

Unrounded

ä

ę

a

ą

e

v

i

į

eu

ęu

ê

er

äi

ęi

ai

ąi

ei

vi

eui

aeu

ąeu

veu

–

Vª

æ

æ̃

ɑ

ɑ̃

e

ʌ

i

ĩ

ɯ

ɯ̃

əª

ɜª

æi

æ̃i

ɑi

ɑ̃i

ei

ʌi

ɯi

ɑɯ

ɑ̃ɯ

ʌɯ

Ø

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

↓

Vº

œ

œ̃

ɔ

ɔ̃

ø

o

y

ỹ

u

ũ

əº

ɜº

œy

œ̃y

ɔy

ɔ̃y

øy

oy

uy

ɔu

ɔ̃u

ou

Ø

Rounded

äu

ǫe

oa

ǫ

oe

o

u

ų

ou

ǫu

ô

or

eü

ęü

aoü

ąoü

oeü

oü

ouü

aou

ąou

oöu

–

Rounding (and lack thereof) is essentially a suprasegmental here (denoted º and ª, respectively), and one that often applies to whole words. Two vowels, however, get notated with these flags whenever they occur: /ə/ surfaces as [e] or [ɛ] unless rounded, where it becomes [o] or [ɔ] instead; /ɜ/ is always phonetically the same. How exactly /ɜ/ is realized, though generally consistent among individual speakers, is nonetheless variable—such articulations as [ɜ], [ə], [ɑ], [æ], [ɨ], and even [œ] or [y] are known; additionally, it triggers consonant harmony—/ɬ~l/ [θ~ɹ]. Given the particulars of these vowels with the overall system, it is often convenient to use the º ª flags to help illustrate that the vowel is still in such an environment.

There will be few consonants (where a colon appears, the form to the right surfaces when rounding is applied; a hyphen, the effects of ê/ô):

/t~d~dɹ:dw k:p~g:b~n:m ʔ:ŋ/ t~d~dr:dw k:p~b:g~n:m ':ng
/s:z x:h̪͆ h~ɦ/ s ḫ:f h
/ʜ~ʡ/ ḥ
/ɬ-θ~l-ɹ/ l
/j:w/ y:w

I group these into four MOAs:

Stop	T	K	7
Continuant	S	X	H
Resonant	L	Y	2
Null		Ø

These have a stupendous range of realizations:

More: show

• /T/ is realized:
  • As [t] when word-initial, following another voiceless phone, and finally following a non-nasal phone
  • As [d] between a voiced oral consonant and an oral vowel
  • As [dɹ] between a voiced phone and an unrounded nasal vowel
  • As [dw] between a voiced phone and a rounded nasal vowel
• /K/ is realized differently depending on whether the following sound is rounded or not.
  • If /K/ does not precede a rounded vowel, it surfaces:
    • As [k] before a voiceless sound when initial or following a voiceless phone
    • As [g] between a voiced phone and an oral vowel
    • As [n] when standing adjacent to a nasal vowel
  • If /K/ does precede a rounded vowel, it surfaces:
    • As [p] before a voiceless sound when initial or following a voiceless phone
    • As [b] between a voiced phone and an oral vowel
    • As [m] when standing adjacent to a nasal vowel
• /7/ is realized:
  • As [ʔ] initially before an oral vowel or in hiatus between two oral vowels
  • As [ŋ] initially before a nasal vowel, in hiatus between two vowels of which at least one is nasalized, and finally
  • As [ː] (i.e., consonant length) when following a consonant
  • As [Ø] when preceding a consonant
• /S/ is realized:
  • As [s] when initial, when final, and when adjacent to a voiceless phone
  • As [z] when adjacent to a voiced consonant and when intervocalic
• /X/, like its occluded counterpart /K/ above, surfaces differently depending on the roundedness of its environs.
  • If /X/ does not precede a rounded phone, it surfaces:
    • As [x] when initial or when standing next to a voiceless sound
    • As [j] when intervocalic or when final
  • If /X/ does precede a rounded phone, it surfaces as [h̪͆].
• /H/ is realized:
  • As [h] initially or when following a voiceless sound
  • As [ː] (i.e., vowel length) when following a vowel
  • As voicelessness when following a resonant
• /L/ is realized:
  • As [ɬ] adjacent to a voiceless sound (or as [θ] if /ɜ/ is in the word)
  • As [l] when initial, final, or standing next to a voiced consonant (or as [ɹ] if /ɜ/ is in the word)
• /Y/ is realized:
  • As [j] when next to an unrounded phone (except when final)
  • As [w] when next to a rounded phone or when final
• /2/ is realized:
  • As [ʜ] when initial or when next to a voiceless phone
  • As [ʢ] when next to a voiced phone or when final
• /Ø/ is the absence of a vowel.
  
  For clarity, given a cluster -7H- following a vowel V, the /7/ drops as normal but /H/ is considered to follow a "voiceless sound", so it appears as Vh and not a long vowel.

Root structure constraints

Given a root structure √V₁-V₂-V₃:

1. No root can contain three consecutive high vowels.
2. Roots can be "augmented" with either a prefix (V_p) or a suffix (V_s) vowel, but not both.
3. V_p, V₁, and/or V₂ position must contain a diphthong or high vowel.
4. Roots can contain a single null vowel in V₂ or V₃ position.
5. Neither /ə/ nor /ɜ/ may appear in V₁ position.

Examples of valid roots: √ę-i-veu, √į-er-ê, √Ø-eu-ä, √i-a-eu, √eu+a-er-v

√ä-i-veu x ^S-7H-T = sähitveu [sæhidʌ^ɯ]
√e-aeu-v x ^2-H-Ø = ḥehaeuv [ʜeːŋa^ɯʌ]
√a-i-Ø x ^L-Y-7 = laying [lajiŋ]
√eu+ä-Ø-vi x ^H-K-S = euhäksvi [ɯːŋæksʌⁱ]
√e-i-e+ąeu x ^2-K-X-X = ḥegiyeyąeu [ʜegijejã^ɯ]
√ę-į-Ø x ^X-Ø-2 = ḫęįṛ [xæ̃ĩʡ]

I'm debating on adding another constraint that V₁ and V₂ must agree in nasality, but I'm not 100% sold on it.

[Man in Space]

Just had an idea for Caber. Originally I was just going to drop the collective in -(V)r and have it fossilize, but now I’m thinking a schema like

- Fossilization as originally intended
- Collective becoming plural whilst plural becomes default paucal
- Reänalysis of -(V)r as an ‘…and all the rest/…all that jazz/…et al./…that and everything with or like it’ plural
- Reänalysis of -(V)r as a family/people group/descent/origin marker

in different offshoots.

[Lērisama]

Ooh, that looks fun! I just have one question about the following option:

- Reänalysis of -(V)r as an ‘…and all the rest/…all that jazz/…et al./…that and everything with or like it’ plural

Is this supposed to be a kind of associative plural, or something else¹?

¹ I ask because I am still slightly confused by associative plurals

[Man in Space]

Ooh, that looks fun! I just have one question about the following option:

- Reänalysis of -(V)r as an ‘…and all the rest/…all that jazz/…et al./…that and everything with or like it’ plural

Is this supposed to be a kind of associative plural, or something else¹?

¹ I ask because I am still slightly confused by associative plurals

Exactly! I couldn’t remember the name for it.

[Halian]

I bumped into a Man in Space at LCC11 this past weekend. I quite enjoyed his talk on the Caber logograms (and learned that the stress is on the ultima, thus it's not homophonous with “caber” as in “the giant pole tossed as part of Highland Games”).

[Raholeun]

The presentation doesn't seem to be posted on the Language Creation Society channel on YouTube yet, or am I overlooking it?

[Halian]

The presentation doesn't seem to be posted on the Language Creation Society channel on YouTube yet, or am I overlooking it?

They're working on chopping the livestreams up into individual videos. but it's gonna take a while.

[Man in Space]

They’ve asked me to re-record mine (the mic was having issues). I haven’t been able to do so yet but anticipate doing so this weekend.

[Man in Space]

Debating whether to re-romanize CT. Specifically, changing /ŋ x ʕ/ from ĝ ḫ g to _⅁ g ĝ. This would make it more consistent in the romanization as I already have d for /θ/, and I think it'll break LaTeX less.

---

fplor 'weather'

---

Updating the trivoc:

Stop	D	T	J	K	7
Continuant	3	S	Ç	X	H
Resonant	Ð	L	Y	R	2
Null			Ø

I'm trying to be more conscious about the adasar tending to have more coronals—their average vowel count is 7 as opposed to humans' 5, and interdentals have more sticking power for them than us; contrasting multiple coronal POAs seems appropriate.

As before, we've numerous surface realizations of the consonants:

• /D/
  • [t̪s̪] / {#, [-vc]} _ [+hi -nas]
  • [d̪z̪] / [+vc] _ [+hi -nas]
  • [t̪] / {#, [-vc]} _, _ #
  • [d̪] / [+vc] _, _ [+vc]
• /T/
  • [ts] / {#, [-vc]} _ [+hi -nas]
  • [dz] / [+vc] _ [+hi -nas]
  • [dzɹ] / [+vc] _ [+syll -ro +hi +nas]
  • [dzw] / [+vc] _ [+syll +ro +hi +nas]
  • [t] / {#, [-vc]} _, _ #
  • [d] / [+vc -nas] _ [+vc -nas]
  • [dɹ] / [+vc] _ [+syll -ro +nas]
  • [dw] / [+vc] _ [+syll +ro +nas]
• /J/
  • [tʲ ~ tʃ] / free variation; it's common for affrication to occur before high vowels, [j], or [w] if it's only partial
  • [dʲ ~ dʒ] / free variation; it's common for affrication to occur before high vowels, [j], or [w] if it's only partial
  • [ɲ] / _ [+syll +nas]
• /K/
  • [k] / {#, [-vc]} _ [+syll -nas -ro]
  • [g] / [+vc] _ [+syll -nas -ro]
  • [n] / _ [+syll +nas +ro]
  • [p] / {#, [-vc]} _ [+syll -nas +ro]
  • [b] / [+vc] _ [+syll -nas +ro]
  • [m] _ [+syll +nas +ro]
• /7/ (glottal stop)
  • [ʔ] / {#, [+syll -nas]} _ [+syll -nas]
  • [ŋ] / # _ [+syll +nas], [+syll +nas] _ [+syll], [+syll] _ [+syll +nas], _ #
  • [ː] / [-syll] _
  • [Ø] / _ [-syll]
• /3/ (dental continuant)
  • [θ] / {#, [-vc]} _, _ #
  • [ð] / [+vc] _
  • [s̪] / as with [θ] but subject to harmony rules
  • [z̪] / as with [ð] but subject to harmony rules
• /S/ (alveolar continuant)
  • [s] / {#, [-vc]} _, _ #
  • [z] / [+vc] _
• /Ç/ (palatal continuant)
  • [ç ~ ʃ] / {#, [-vc]} _, _ #
  • [ʝ ~ ʒ] / [+vc] _
• /X/ (dorsal continuant)
  • [h̪͆] / _ [+ro]
  • [x] / {#, [-vc]} _
  • [j] / [+syll] _ [+syll], _ #
• /H/
  • [h] / {#, [-vc]} _
  • [ː] / [+syll] _ {[-syll], #}
  • [-vc] / [-syll +son] _
• /Ð/
  • [h̪͆] / _ [+ro]
  • [j] / _ [-ro]
• /L/
  • [ɬ] / [-vc] _, _ [-vc]
  • [l] / else
• /Y/
  • [w] / _ [+ro], [+ro] _
  • [j] / else
• /R/
  • [ʀ ~ ɢ^ʀ] / [+nas] _
  • [ɰ ~ ʁ] / else
• /2/
  • [ʜ] / {#, [-vc]} _, _ [-vc]
  • [ʢ] / _ #

/Ø/ is the absence of a consonant.

[Tsimaah]

I'm trying to be more conscious about the adasar tending to have more coronals—their average vowel count is 7 as opposed to humans' 5, and interdentals have more sticking power for them than us; contrasting multiple coronal POAs seems appropriate.

Is there an anatomical difference between Adasar and humans that makes coronal consonants more distinctive?

[Man in Space]

I'm trying to be more conscious about the adasar tending to have more coronals—their average vowel count is 7 as opposed to humans' 5, and interdentals have more sticking power for them than us; contrasting multiple coronal POAs seems appropriate.

Is there an anatomical difference between Adasar and humans that makes coronal consonants more distinctive?

Yes. Slightly longer mouths and keener hearing.

[bradrn]

Debating whether to re-romanize CT. Specifically, changing /ŋ x ʕ/ from ĝ ḫ g to _⅁ g ĝ. This would make it more consistent in the romanization as I already have d for /θ/, and I think it'll break LaTeX less.

You find _⅁ preferable to ĝ? Seriously? Maybe in the days of metal type it was, but not so much now…

(As for LaTeX, it should cope fine with any of these — certainly if you’re using XeLaTeX or LuaLaTeX it should. What problems are you encountering?)