Name That Language!

[dendana]

Is this Ashéninka Perené?

I got there by noticing it looked South American, using Saphon to find phonologies that matched the text, and then going on a deep dive through the Comparative Arawakan Lexical Dataset - the words for 'fruit' and 'woman', chochoki and kooya respectively, were very helpful. Finally I used this article to try and narrow things down even further - kameetsa 'good' helped nail down one isogloss, and I'm guessing based on the incidences of <tzi> but not <ti> that we're on the atziri 'person' side of the atziri-atiri isogloss.

If it's not Ashéninka Perené, is it at least one of the Ashe-Asha languages?

[bradrn]

Is this Ashéninka Perené?

Yes it is.

(I must admit that I am absolutely gobsmacked that you figured it out this quickly. How do you even find all these databases? It took me an inordinate amount of time even to find a grammar of Ashéninka Perené when I was looking for it last year, and I posted it specifically because I thought it would take ages to find.)

[dendana]

Aw thanks. Great detective work yourself with Lamaholot!

To be honest, I just spend way too much time collecting grammars and comparative dictionaries/studies. Comparative lexica give me a lot of inspiration for diachronic conlanging and general aesthetics. It's incredible how much stuff is available online for free.

Next:

Sǔrŋá kɨrmó Poora kɨ́ dáíŋ
Ba̱rʉ́ dɨó, ná lóó tog bɨ́r kôŋ
Ásáŋ bá dáíŋ Sʉʉrʉ kaiŋ
Bɨ́ sai la bɨ́wél, bɨ́ kila kwa
Sʉʉrʉ dáíŋ-lé, bɨ́ aál aál béla
Ná ba̱rʉ dáíŋ kí káíŋ kona-ii

[bradrn]

To be honest, I just spend way too much time collecting grammars and comparative dictionaries/studies. Comparative lexica give me a lot of inspiration for diachronic conlanging and general aesthetics. It's incredible how much stuff is available online for free.

Yeah, I have far too many grammars as well, plus everything from the Grammar Pile.

Sǔrŋá kɨrmó Poora kɨ́ dáíŋ
Ba̱rʉ́ dɨó, ná lóó tog bɨ́r kôŋ
Ásáŋ bá dáíŋ Sʉʉrʉ kaiŋ
Bɨ́ sai la bɨ́wél, bɨ́ kila kwa
Sʉʉrʉ dáíŋ-lé, bɨ́ aál aál béla
Ná ba̱rʉ dáíŋ kí káíŋ kona-ii

Going from the ⟨ŋ⟩ this looks African… but ⟨ʉ⟩ is more South American, so I’m not sure. The underlined ⟨a̱⟩ is extremely distinctive, but I have no clue what language it could be from.

[dendana]

Sǔrŋá kɨrmó Poora kɨ́ dáíŋ
Ba̱rʉ́ dɨó, ná lóó tog bɨ́r kôŋ
Ásáŋ bá dáíŋ Sʉʉrʉ kaiŋ
Bɨ́ sai la bɨ́wél, bɨ́ kila kwa
Sʉʉrʉ dáíŋ-lé, bɨ́ aál aál béla
Ná ba̱rʉ dáíŋ kí káíŋ kona-ii

Going from the ⟨ŋ⟩ this looks African… but ⟨ʉ⟩ is more South American, so I’m not sure. The underlined ⟨a̱⟩ is extremely distinctive, but I have no clue what language it could be from.

Well, one of the continents you named is correct.

[bradrn]

Sǔrŋá kɨrmó Poora kɨ́ dáíŋ
Ba̱rʉ́ dɨó, ná lóó tog bɨ́r kôŋ
Ásáŋ bá dáíŋ Sʉʉrʉ kaiŋ
Bɨ́ sai la bɨ́wél, bɨ́ kila kwa
Sʉʉrʉ dáíŋ-lé, bɨ́ aál aál béla
Ná ba̱rʉ dáíŋ kí káíŋ kona-ii

Going from the ⟨ŋ⟩ this looks African… but ⟨ʉ⟩ is more South American, so I’m not sure. The underlined ⟨a̱⟩ is extremely distinctive, but I have no clue what language it could be from.

Well, one of the continents you named is correct.

In that case I’ll guess African — it doesn’t look very South American aside from ⟨ʉ⟩. If anything, it looks more Chadic.

[Karch]

It does indeed look Chadic, but if it isn't, Fur?

[dendana]

It does indeed look Chadic, but if it isn't, Fur?

Yes, it is Fur!

[Karch]

χamᵊi diørɣut moqsan tandər əm duruⁿ banjəm.
dači Ili birat ňimʁa dəvər dəvər.
nadəⁿ saʁənč əm čiškə bətkəf jəm vajəqᵘ̊.
son təva guruⁿ gum suyeⁿ ba?
təsk laft jiʁa mind aqᵘ̊.
χačačiⁿ nanᵊmaq yavm.
if χůarənt bənərəŋəf giraⁿ čičivm zəm.
əndürid ňi gəɹ əjəⁿ čiškᵊi.
moɴmaq banšk ərindəri moɴ gəf laft.

[Darren]

Is it a Berber language?

[fusijui]

So -- is the 'rule' about not using narrow phonetic transcriptions of languages in place of ~phonemic/established orthographies, for the sake of obfuscation, out the window again?

[bradrn]

So -- is the 'rule' about not using narrow phonetic transcriptions of languages in place of ~phonemic/established orthographies, for the sake of obfuscation, out the window again?

I don’t recall that one. But it doesn’t look like a narrow transcription — something with ⟨ᵊ č ů ü⟩ doesn’t look phonetic at all.

[Nortaneous]

what the hell?

iranian?

[dendana]

χamᵊi diørɣut moqsan tandər əm duruⁿ banjəm.
dači Ili birat ňimʁa dəvər dəvər.
nadəⁿ saʁənč əm čiškə bətkəf jəm vajəqᵘ̊.
son təva guruⁿ gum suyeⁿ ba?
təsk laft jiʁa mind aqᵘ̊.
χačačiⁿ nanᵊmaq yavm.
if χůarənt bənərəŋəf giraⁿ čičivm zəm.
əndürid ňi gəɹ əjəⁿ čiškᵊi.
moɴmaq banšk ərindəri moɴ gəf laft.

Out of curiosity, what is <ᵘ̊> supposed to represent, if you know?

[bradrn]

χamᵊi diørɣut moqsan tandər əm duruⁿ banjəm.
dači Ili birat ňimʁa dəvər dəvər.
nadəⁿ saʁənč əm čiškə bətkəf jəm vajəqᵘ̊.
son təva guruⁿ gum suyeⁿ ba?
təsk laft jiʁa mind aqᵘ̊.
χačačiⁿ nanᵊmaq yavm.
if χůarənt bənərəŋəf giraⁿ čičivm zəm.
əndürid ňi gəɹ əjəⁿ čiškᵊi.
moɴmaq banšk ərindəri moɴ gəf laft.

Out of curiosity, what is <ᵘ̊> supposed to represent, if you know?

I’m assuming it’s a superscript form of ⟨ů⟩. From what I’ve seen, superscript vowels usually represent vowels which are voiceless or dropped.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

Is it Avestan?

[dendana]

Out of curiosity, what is <ᵘ̊> supposed to represent, if you know?

I’m assuming it’s a superscript form of ⟨ů⟩. From what I’ve seen, superscript vowels usually represent vowels which are voiceless or dropped.

Yeah, that makes sense. I'm curious what <ů> is too - I've only seen that in a Czech context before

[Karch]

My source is quite misleading, but apparently regular <ů>, which seems to be an allophone of <u> after uvulars, is something like [ɔ] and superscript <ů> denotes labialization after uvulars.

So -- is the 'rule' about not using narrow phonetic transcriptions of languages in place of ~phonemic/established orthographies, for the sake of obfuscation, out the window again?

If I phonemicized the sentences I'd run counter to another "rule", which states that you shouldn't change the transcription used in the source. Besides, I don't even know what's phonemic and what isn't, since the author of my source didn't even attempt to formulate a proper phonemic inventory, instead opting for something in between phonemic and phonetic.

Is it a Berber language?

what the hell?

iranian?

The language however is neither Iranian nor Berber.

[bradrn]

Is it a Berber language?

what the hell?

iranian?

The language however isn't neither Iranian nor Berber.

…is that a double negative? Or is it a typo for ‘…is neither Iranian nor Berber’?

[Karch]

…is that a double negative? Or is it a typo for ‘…is neither Iranian nor Berber’?

Sorry, I of course meant "is neither Iranian nor Berber".