Zompist Bboard Again

bradrn wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 5:49 pm

chris_notts wrote: ↑Sat Jan 21, 2023 12:58 pm So which set of consonants do you think is most distinctive in coda position mid-word, {j, N, χ, 0} or {j, N, f, 0}?

I think they’re both equally distinctive. [χ] and [ʃ] already feel very far away to me, and [χ] and [j] even further apart. But really, I think it all depends on how your language structures its consonants — e.g. in Hebrew they’d be straightforwardly different, whereas in Spanish (where [j~ʝ] can merge into [ʒ] and [x] can be velar) they might be considered a lot more similar. I recall Nortaneous talking about the fact that which phonemes ‘choose’ to interact with which others can be quite different between languages; something similar applies here, I think.

chris_notts wrote: ↑Sun Jan 22, 2023 4:10 am I think I'll probably go with /f/ for now. With more complex agglutinative morphologies I always worry about accidentally creating too much ambiguity or too little distinctiveness...

chris_notts wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:04 am Spotted some mistakes, e.g. preverbal should be prevocalic in the orthography section.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:35 am

chris_notts wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:04 am Spotted some mistakes, e.g. preverbal should be prevocalic in the orthography section.

And judging from your vowel chart, short vowels are laxer than long vowels.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:35 am

chris_notts wrote: ↑Mon Feb 06, 2023 3:04 am Spotted some mistakes, e.g. preverbal should be prevocalic in the orthography section.

And judging from your vowel chart, short vowels are laxer than long vowels.

Jonlang wrote: ↑Sun Feb 26, 2023 10:39 amDoes anyone here put "Easter eggs" into their conlangs?

Emily wrote: ↑Tue Feb 28, 2023 4:24 pm i've put the same kids in the hall joke in like 6 different conlangs at this point

chris_notts wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 11:13 amI'm thinking on and off about what a preference to incorporate basic complements would mean. Some questions:

1. Locational predicates classify the located object. Is this lost in the copular case in favour of a single verb, e.g. -a' "sit, 3d object" also being used for all permanent states of affairs, or is some classification retained? If so, should it be reduced compared to the locational classification case, which also distinguishes orientation in some cases? Orientation is not very relevant for permanent states.

2. Does this apply to identity statements? Probably not... Can't see "I am your father" being I your-father-am,

3. What to do about complex NPs like "I'm a tall man"? Adj-N compounds are possible, but I'm not sure incorporating them should be the standard way to express a complex copula complement. Could split it, e.g. I-man-am, I-tall-am, or could allow an unincorporated alternative for complex complements, or could incorporate the focal element and allow the rest to remain outside the verb, e.g. I-tall-am the man = I'm a tall man, I-man-am the tall = I'm a tall man

Ahzoh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 4:00 pm I have a language that I intend on making Ergative-Absolutive, at least when it comes to polypersonal agreement. I came up with an interesting idea that both serves to distinguish transitive verbs from intransitive ones and possibly hint at an origin to the language's ergative-absolutive nature. I wonder if it's plausible/naturalistic?

Intransitive:
о-ть-аі
NTR-be-3s.ABS
"he/she is"
о-м-аі
NTR-die-3s.ABS
"he/she dies"

Transitive:
ту-ть-аі
1s.ERG-be-3s.ABS
"I cause him/her to be"
ту-м-аі
1s.ERG-die-3s.ABS
"I kill him/her"

keenir wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 3:46 pm I'm afraid I'm not sure what you mean by classification...do you mean it would say what you're sitting on? ie, sitting on wood/chair

INTRANS = be/move into configuration

-(h)a'   sitting animates, as well as compact 3d objects which are not notably elongated along any one dimensional. It is also the default positional for inanimate objects.
-yef	 standing animates, as well inanimates which are notably tall or extended vertically.
-tél     lying animates, as well as inanimates which are notably width or deep compared to their vertical extension.
-k'at    covers objects suspended, either within a medium (floating) or by a rope, hook etc. 
-ól      covers liquids, masses (e.g. grain, sand), large piles of objects, and abstract entities
-tzai    covers flexible objects such as rope and clothing
-cho'    covers objects of any state which are physically distributed or scattered, or which fall into various types

TRANS = have/put into configuration 

-be'     animate objects
-(h)a'tz    compact 3d objects which are not notably elongated along any one dimensional. It is also the default for inanimate objects.
-fin     long rigid objects of any orientation. Normally these objects must be long compared to the human body; smaller objects like pencils often take -a'tz unless their shape is relevant.
-te'tz   flat rigid objects of any orientation.
-k'án    attached or internal objects, especially body parts, organs.
-ótz     liquids, masses (e.g. grain, sand), large piles of objects, and abstract entities
-tzín    flexible objects such as rope and clothing
-chu'š   objects of any state which are physically distributed or scattered, or which fall into various types 

Maybe for permanent states, the orientation becomes/is the default? like "Today the President signed into law XYZ" and either signed, president or both are using the Sitting orientation.

maybe... I-am your-father-am ?

chris_notts wrote: ↑Thu Mar 09, 2023 5:01 pm I was thinking about using zero/apposition for identity statements, probably in predicate/complement first order, e.g.:

matet ci' = 2-father I

Although that gets confusing with predicates involving third persons because there's no overt genitive marker:

ratet uta' = 3-father he/she/it = his/her father OR he is his/her father

Perhaps a fronted topic structure is better:

uta' ai ratet = he TOP 3-father