Zompist Bboard Again

Yalensky wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 5:15 pm

Almeopedia wrote:There is no article yet for Lirfilis.

Some typo!

Clear your cache and try again; that usually fixes it.

(Also, zomp, the word Ctesifon in the first sentence under "Among the Iliu" is missing an 'f'.)

Thanks! That worked.

Come to think of it, -om/-om is what you would expect based on the Classical Caďinor forms -om / -oim. Maybe the Mažtane versions came from somewhere else.

What was the status of iliu in Caďin religion? If an emperor came back from a visit with a lot of new ideas and said 'an iliu told me to do this' I assume you might react sceptically (or would, if the person in question wasn't an emperor, of course).

So Haleza Grise wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2019 11:04 pmWhat was the status of iliu in Caďin religion? If an emperor came back from a visit with a lot of new ideas and said 'an iliu told me to do this' I assume you might react sceptically (or would, if the person in question wasn't an emperor, of course).

They were hardly ever seen in the Caďinorian heartland, so they were virtually creatures of legend. Maranh was said to have married one. To actually bring a bunch of them back to Ctesifon was sensational.

The political story of Lirfilis is perhaps one to expand some day. It surely wasn't straightforward : in general, people don't like change. But it was good that she had a military victory and the support of the army. And she wasn't asking for, say, a religious reform.

In Proto-Eastern Philology, Obenzayet is described as reflecting *bekt- and *klāg- both as ɣläɣ- in past definite forms except on third person plural.

Some other ones:

Under the morphological summary, and the Verbal morphology section, the present 1p of lelen is listed as lelal instead of lelam.

Under "Irregularities" in Nominal morphology, lož and řič are missing final î.

Under "Conditional" in Constructions, Ac esli e Aďei, řo epcelo iler ceštan. has the verb glossed as 2s when it should be 2p.

Also in Constructions - "In colloquial speech, VSO order is almost always maintained," should I think be SVO.

Under "Other subordinators", Řo šrifcao [kiel soî surî voitcu im tiplüba lë] should probably have šrifao instead. Also, under "sluicing" Tu šutne šerä im nuvan esë, er vulu šricao ke. should probably have šrifec.

These should be fixed; thanks much!

This is actually a Cadhinor typo, but I didn't want to make a thread about it.

From: https://www.zompist.com/cadhex.htm

vacus shrine > varurion priest of such a shrine

That should be vacurion.

In the Xurnese grammar, there is a missing Xurnese sentence, while the gloss still appears:

The Xurnese grammar wrote:Puciga ‘again’ takes a bit more context:

There were rumors that an iliu had been seen in the city. There was intense excitement, but nothing could be confirmed. In a few months the furor had died down. The iliu wasn’t seen again.

The etymology given for Sarroc is slightly mangled; instead of "Sarroc ‘east’ + loc ’speech’ (from Munkhâshi lok)" it should probably read "sar ‘east’ + loc ’speech’ (from Munkhâshi lok)".

There's a formatting error in the pronunciation of Dhekhnam which leads to it being presented as a URL.

Fixed, except for the Xurnese one. There was never a Xurnese text for that, it was intended to make the point using the English example. It'd take too much time right now to create a matching Xurnese text. Maybe later!

In the menu of the Thematic Dictionary of Verdurian, the menu linking to the Conjunctions section says Conjugations.

The text in http://zompist.com/v-aluatas.png reads Aluatas i soa Sfhae.

(When are we getting dialect descriptions by the way?)

Fixed, thanks!

(Dialects... oh man, why does anyone have dialects... just makes more work for linguists and conlinguists!)

zompist wrote: ↑Sat Feb 08, 2020 12:42 pm(Dialects... oh man, why does anyone have dialects... just makes more work for linguists and conlinguists!)

Because, unless all the speakers of a given language interact on a regular basis, speakers of languages are bound to create their own expressions, and that's not counting the general drift in language change bound to happen by mere chance?

It was a joke, my dude.

zompist wrote: ↑Mon Feb 10, 2020 7:50 pm It was a joke, my dude.

I knew

Not really a typo, rather an erratum:

In the Lexipedia, under the section Society, subsection Customs (sorry, I have the Kindle version, can’t give a page number!) you have diolch as the Breton for “thank”, citing the etymology as ‘prayer’.

• diolch is Welsh, not Breton;
• its etymology is from a verb meaning ‘to praise’ in Proto-Celtic, not ‘to pray’;
• the Breton word for ‘thanks’ is trugarezh, a direct calque in Brythonic of the Latin misericordia “mercy”;
• the word’s use for “thanks” in Breton is basically calqued from French merci.

Notwithstanding the above, I do want to mention that the Lexipedia is my favourite of your conlanging books!

Actually, while I’m at it, a few pages later you give give the etymology of Irish focal as “name”. It’s actually from Proto-Celtic *woxtlom “word”, which is ultimately from PIE *wekw- “to speak”.

In the 'Introduction' page of the grammar there are a few examples using mizec for "speak" - Soa Sfahe zet mis zdesy and similar. But I thought the verb for "speak" was sfahen? The dictionary still seems to define it that way.

Another small typo in "Constructions": The man who Ihano invited to his house yesterda loves plays is missing a "-y" in "yesterday".