Zompist Bboard Again

Well, thanks. It is indeed a conlang, and you're right; it is Austronesian-ish in nature (Faux-Formosan if you will).

Also my question could be formulated better. I noticed that Sataw had quite a variety of modern surface forms where the reconstructed Proto-Austronesian has *q. So rather than keeping strictly to the academic reconstruction, I posited three consonants *q1, *q2 and *q3. All of these are postvelar, perhaps q, ɢ and ʔʱ (although I like to pretend to be agnostic regarding the exact quality of the three original postvelars). All of these surface as ʔ root initially in Modern Sataw.

But historically when this root got suffixed with one of *q1, *q2, *q3 or conjoined with a compound word that had one of these as an initial consonant, the guttural quality of that last consonant affected that of others "downstream" the word. So in short, that's my explanation for Modern Sataw's /k~h~ʔ~Ø/.

Are there natural languages which do a similar thing; having initial consonant mutations that are caused not by preceding sounds, but by consonants at the other end of the word? The stuff I could find by a quick google check didn't seem to fit the profile really. There closest candidate is the Fulani language as mentioned in Das grammatische Raritätenkabinett: "phonological alternation of stem-initial consonants conditioned by suffix". Unfortunately I haven't yet found their original source to have a closer look.

Raholeun wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2019 2:28 pm Are there natural languages which do a similar thing; having initial consonant mutations that are caused not by preceding sounds, but by consonants at the other end of the word? The stuff I could find by a quick google check didn't seem to fit the profile really. There closest candidate is the Fulani language as mentioned in Das grammatische Raritätenkabinett: "phonological alternation of stem-initial consonants conditioned by suffix". Unfortunately I haven't yet found their original source to have a closer look.

http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~merril ... tation.pdf

lost noun class prefixes?

-

mae wrote: ↑Tue Apr 23, 2019 8:51 pm Been thinking of doing a language with verb serialization to indicate lots of functions. Here's an idea: motion verbs 'come' and 'go' grammaticalized as expressions of mediopassive and transitive derivation. For the first thing I feel like English is a good precedent ('it came to be done', 'it became done', etc.) but 'go' for transitive isn't something I'm aware of precedent for.

window come SS-break
'the window breaks'

3sg go SS-break window
'he breaks the window'

Maybe it could derive from analogy or some kind of earlier telicity thing?

Usually, the applicative is derived from verb meaning to give.

Do you know how a telic marker evolved from?

Akangka wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:55 am Usually, the applicative is derived from verb meaning to give.

Do you have something you can suggest to read about that? It seems plausible, and could certainly explain how one and the same marker can represent both applicatives and causatives, which is supposed to be fairly common, but I mostly remember reading of cases where they seem to come from prepositions.

Come to think of it, the only overt applicative I have any hope of using is Mandarin gěi 給, which is also give.

Well, the Romance and Germanic languages families are obviously festooned with applicatives formed from prepositions.

akam chinjir wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 12:09 pm

Akangka wrote: ↑Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:55 am Usually, the applicative is derived from verb meaning to give.

Do you have something you can suggest to read about that? It seems plausible, and could certainly explain how one and the same marker can represent both applicatives and causatives, which is supposed to be fairly common, but I mostly remember reading of cases where they seem to come from prepositions.

http://www.deniscreissels.fr/public/Cre ... periph.pdf

It is very common for a language with serial verb construction to have a periphrastic applicative voice with a verb meaning give.

Thanks! (Though I'm tempted to rebut: and it's very common for languages with prepositions to have a periphrastic applicative voice with a preposition meaning for.---The paper's discussion of this issue on p.7 isn't really satisfying.)

Many languages have not just one applicative, but several ones, and while it's probably true that the one that includes a benefactive meaning is most likely derived from "give" in a language that has (or had) serial verb constructions, that's not the only option. For example, an original motion verb with a meaning like "go to", "approach", "arrive at", or similar could also easily be grammaticalised to cover a similar range as a "give"-derived applicative. And then, of course, the example that was given by mae does not even have benefactive semantics, but adds a target/theme/undergoer argument instead, so a marker for this could also derive from a completely different verb, for instance something like "affect", "hit", or "touch".

Nortaneous wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2019 11:32 pm http://linguistics.berkeley.edu/~merril ... tation.pdf

lost noun class prefixes?

Thanks for the link, Nort. It is an interesting article and a lot of the terminology it uses is relevant for me.

Unfortunately it doesn't quite describe what happens in Sataw. Merill's samples come from language families all across the globe: Celtic, Numic, West-Atlantic, Bantu, Uralic, Austronesian and some others. In all those cases -and not exactly uncommon- the initial consonant mutation is caused by a historical prefix or another type of adjacent segment that may have been lost in the modern language. For example, a prefix may have caused the initial consonant of the stem to become intervocalic and then some rule was applied (intervocalic voicing of plosives for instance), before losing the prefix, causing a morphologically triggered "regular irregular" alternation of initial consonants.

But in the case of Sataw, the historical trigger is not adjacent at all. It is a form of long distance dissimilation of postvelar stops. I personally have a very hard time producing a word like /qasaq/ or /ɢasaɢ/; one of the stops will allophonically be dissimilated to something like [k~ʔ]. I just decided to systematize this and developed as a context something I pompously call the Postvelar Theory of Sataw. I'm not entirely set on the implications it would have for placement of stress though. Also, what happens in *qRV- or *C.q-environments?

Well, at least I have something to occupy me for the day..

I have a world where people are required to hunt monsters. However, the monster kills so many humans, that humans have to reproduce quickly so it can be balanced. (The life expectancy of the human is just 37) How to design that society without being too sexist.

Also, how to design a conlang that sounds energetic and happy-go-lucky.

Akangka wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:30 am Also, how to design a conlang that sounds energetic and happy-go-lucky.

I'd use a lot of unvoiced consonants, vowel length and diphthongs and maybe tone but that's from my own personal sound symbolism.

Akangka wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:30 am Also, how to design a conlang that sounds energetic and happy-go-lucky.

Lots of full reduplication and short words (1 or 2 syllables being the most common length)?

Akangka wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2019 2:30 am Also, how to design a conlang that sounds energetic and happy-go-lucky.

I'm not sure there even is one way of doing this, to be honest - I would second linguistcat in saying that it all depends on your personal sound symbolism. And I would think that something which is 'energetic and happy-go-lucky' for you won't necessarily have that impression for anyone else.

Another newb question: what is a periphrastic applicative voice? My current conlang has a deep and pervasive love of serial verb constructions, so it would probably have that if it is frequently associated with verb series.

Knit Tie wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:06 am Another newb question: what is a periphrastic applicative voice? My current conlang has a deep and pervasive love of serial verb constructions, so it would probably have that if it is frequently associated with verb series.

Basically like periphrastic passive voice, but for applicative voice. Like:

I go give you

I went for you

I eat sit room dining

I eat in dining room

Knit Tie wrote: ↑Mon Apr 29, 2019 5:06 am Another newb question: what is a periphrastic applicative voice? My current conlang has a deep and pervasive love of serial verb constructions, so it would probably have that if it is frequently associated with verb series.

I wouldn't know off the top of my head, but I think I could work it out. According to the ALC, an applicative is used to promote a peripheral argument to a direct object, for instance: (examples copied from ALC)

Poro

big

cise

house

e-horari

applic-live

He lives in a big house. (from Ainu; promoting location > object)

Aster

Aster

mət’rəgiya-w-ɨn

broom-def-acc

dəǰǰ

doorway

t’ərrəgə-čč-ɨbb-ət

sweep.perf-3f-inst-3mo

Aster swept the doorway with a broom. (from Amharic; promoting instrumental > object)

So presumably a periphrastic applicative is something which acts like an applicative, but is formed periphrastically (through syntax) rather than morphologically. For instance, like English has a periphrastic causative (I make him build it rather than He build-CAUS me it). Potentially a periphrastic applicative could be something like Spade apply him build it to mean He built it with a spade (although I'm very probably wrong with this example).