Zompist Bboard Again

Alright, here's my 48 hour (plus two) conlang. It's a start, at least, which is more than I can say for my conlanging output over the last long while.

I tried to do the opposite of the obstruent-heavy, morphologically complex languages I'm comfortable with. This language is much more vowel-centric and is fairly isolating.

Oh, and its name? Räccäu "the people's language", "language of the people" (I'll eventually have to do some conworlding to make this more interesting)

<räccäu>
[ɹættʃäy]
/ɹät-tʃau/
people-speech

Gonna post the beginnings of phonology, morphosyntax, and example sentences below.

Let's start with a little Phonology. Just a sketch so far. Also, I need to figure out the glossing system on the new board when I'm not exhausted.

Here's the phoneme inventory
Plosives: /pʰ p tʰ t tʃʰ kʰ k/
Fricatives: /f s ʃ χ/
Sonorants: /m n r ɹ j/
Short Vowels: /i e y æ a o u/
Long Vowels: /e: a: o:/
Diphthongs: /ei æy au ou/

Orthography (which I'll be using exclusively in following posts)
<p b t d c k g>
<f s š x>
<m n rr r j>
<i e ü ä a o u>
<é á ó>
<ei äu au ou>

Syllable structure:
C(ɹ)V(V)(n,s,t)

• where VV = long vowel or diphthong

• and coda (n,s,t) can assimilate to the following onset

Possible onset clusters (with /r\/)
/pʰɹ pɹ tʰɹ tɹ kʰɹ kɹ fɹ/
<pr br tr dr kr gr fr>

Root structure:
(CVX).C(ɹ)V(V)(n,s,t)

• V in optional first syllable can only be /i e a o/

• X in optional first syllable can only be gemination or homoorganic nasal (which can be analyzed as /t n/)

Functional particles typically have the same CVX structure as the optional first root syllable, with some exceptions

Word-final stress (on lexical words)

• this is where sentence-level intonation appears when the word has phrasal stress

• otherwise, the final syllable is slightly louder and longer

The maximal word is disyllabic. This will be important in the (limited) morphology.

Phrasal stress on the first lexical word of the phonological phrase

• sentence intonation occurs here (e.g., dipping tone HLH for yes-no question)

• default tonal rise on (last syllable of lexical word with) phrasal stress

Phonological phrases can have maximally two lexical words. Otherwise, you get more than one phonological phrase (and thus more than one tonal rise).

Morphosyntax and examples to follow!

Morphology! Typically overdone in my conlangs, here much abbreviated.

1. There's very productive root compounding (i.e., making a compound out of two roots)

• Compounding causes phonological alternations between parts of the compound

• This can include vowel harmony, reduction of the first part of the compound

• Compounds will usually be head-final--but remember, this is just a first go

2. There's also a limited number of (C)V- derivational prefixes

Otherwise, Räccäu is isolating.

Disyllabic maximality can block prefixation and compounding

• This often triggers periphrasis, though I'm working out the deets

Some roots are nouns or verbs by default
Other roots can be either depending on syntactic context
Derivational prefixes always determine the category of resulting word (well, except for reduplication, kinda)

Verbal Prefixes:
se- (še- before c): adds agent argument, sort of a causativizer; I'll add some twists

na- : inchoative, change-of-state

i- : distributive

reduplication: habitual aspect and/or subject nominalization "X VERBS habitually" = "X is a VERB-er"

Syntax: let's make this interesting! Or, at least more interesting than I usually do.

Sentence: Subject NP -- Verb -- Object NP -- PPs
Verb: Pronouns -- TAM -- lexical verb
NP: Article -- noun
PP: Preposition -- NP (the prepositions might turn out to be more like coverbs)

There's a distinction between clitic pronouns vs. free pronouns

• Clitic pronouns precede TAM + verb

Zero copula (again, makes the result of reduplication ambiguous between habitual aspect and subject nominalization)

Functional particles always precede the lexical word; they're pretty much proclitics.
If a lexical word moves, its preceding functional particles must move with it

Räccäu has a bunch of functional C (sentence-level) particle that trigger verb or NP movement

• Mood and pragmatic particles precede the fronted TAM + lexical verb

• any C-associated intonation appears on the fronted lexical verb; all following material has lower tone with a compressed pitch range

• Topic and focus particles follow the front NP; I put a comma after the particle, since there's usually a slightly pause and drop in pitch

There can only be two NPs unmarked with prepositions/coverbs per clause: subject and object
Ditransitive clauses (or transitive clauses with lexically intransitive verbs): the additional object introduced with coverb/preposition

Räccäu has no passivization or argument reduction
Instead, it uses the following roughly equivalent strategy

• topicalize the non-subject NP (move it front with a following topic marker)

• replace subjecrt NP with impersonal pronoun

Ok, examples coming up!

Finally, some example sentences:

šü krá
dog run
"Dog run"

I'm purposely translating it this way, without an English article or tense; you can omit articles and tense in Räccäu, and the result gets default values based on context. However, (overt) articles and tense are common in Räccäu; you only omit them when they're obvious from context.

šü sekrá bräu
dog chase cat
"Dog chase cat"

šü ced tän
dog eat meat
"Dog eat meat"

trei še-ced šü go tän
woman caus-eat dog PAT meat
"Woman feed dog meat"

Here, <še-> (= se- befor <c>) is causativizing 'eat', so it's equivalent to "woman make dog eat meat". <tän> 'meat' gets a patient preposition (I'll work this out more), since you can't have two unmarked objects, and for this particular causativized verb, the causee it its object.

trei kedrei tän
woman cook meat
"Woman cook meat"

trei kedrei tän ši min
woman cook meat for child
"Woman cook meat for child"

OTOH, you can't use <se-> to add an argument to <kedrei> 'cook' (it's two syllables). Instead, you use the preposition <ši> (which might also be a coverb 'give').

bräu rrós
cat sleep
"Cat sleep"

bräu na-rrós
cat inch-sleep
"Cat falls asleep"

min xäs
child walk
"Child walk"

min i-xäs
child dstrib-walk
"Child walk around"

min rrox-xäs
child sleep-walk
"Child sleepwalk"

Note the right-head compound verb <rroxxäs> is /rrós-xäs/, with vowel shortening and fricative assimilation changing the first part of the compound.

You've made it this far! Your reward: tense and aspect!

min krá
child run
"Child run"

Child is running = min fe krá
Child runs (habitually) = min ka-krá
Child ran (once) = min ti krá
Child was running = min fid krá
Child used to run = min ted ka-krá
Child will run = min ja krá

Progressive/continuous (will work out deets) is <fe>. Past perfective is <ti>. Past progressive is <fid>; I'm giving it the diachronic origin /fe-ti/. Future is /ja/. Habitual is the reduplicative prefix: <krá> --> <ka-krá>. Past habitual adds <ted>, diachronically the reduplication of /ti/ --> /ti-ti/.

Hey, have some articles, will ya?

fixei fe pén
bird prog fly
"Bird is flying"

Some bird(s) is/are flying = re fixei fe pén
The/this bird is flying = o fixei fe pén
The/that bird is flying = do fixei fe pén
The birds are flying = ban fixei fe pén

Indefinite is <re>, no number information. Definite plural is <ban>. There are two definite singulars, which differ in deixis: 'the/this' is <o>, 'the/that' is <do>. There will be more complications here, of course!

Here's some subject nominalizations. If you put an NP in front of them, it's ambiguous between "NP is a VERB-er" and "NP VERBS (habitually)". All of the next four have reduplication, which alters the first syllable.

Runner = ka-krá
Eater = cic-ced
Sleeper = rrot-rós
Walker = xex-xäs

If your verb is already disyllabic, the nominalization is done by periphrasis = a proclitic. The specific proclitic depends on (1) any derivational prefix on the verb, or (2) the event structure of the verb. <sid> is used for a prototypical action, and with <se-> verbs. <je> is used with verbs where the subject has less control or is less direct, and with <i-> verbs.

Chaser = sid sekrá
Feeder = sid šeced
Cook = sid kedrei
Sleepwalker = je rroxxäs
Walker-arounder = je xexxäs

Here's some syntax! Rudiments, at least.

au krá šü
PQ run dog
"Do dog run?"

(cf. šü krá = "dog run")

The verb <krá> is fronted to right after the polar question particle <au>. The fronted verb also has falling-rising tone on its final syllable.

au še-ced trei šü go tän?
PQ caus-eat woman dog PAT meat
"Do woman feed dog meat?"

(cf. trei še-ced šü go tän = "woman caus-eat dog pat meat" = "Woman feed dog meat")

Here's more of a clarification question, with the particle <be>. The TAM proclitic <ted> gets fronted along with the verb.

do min ted rrox-xäs
that child past.hab sleep-walk
"That child used to sleepwalk"

be ted rrox-xäs do min?
CQ past.hab sleep-walk that child
"That child used to sleepwalk, right?"

Here's a polite requeste particle, <ce>.

gé se-xäs o šü
you caus-walk this dog
"You take this dog for a walk"

ce sexäs gé o šü
please caus-walk you this dog
"Please take this dog for a walk"

More pronoun fun! Pronouns precede lexical verbs (plus TAM if it's there). The order is subject-object

fü na prás
s/he me love
S/he love me

me fäu prás
I him/her love
"I love him/her"

So, subject singular pronouns are 1st <me>, 2nd <gé>, 3rd <fü>. Object singular pronouns are 1st <na>, 3rd <fäu> (I haven't made up 2nd person yet). There's more options for the vowels than in usual functional particles.

Now for some topicalization of non-subjects, which is a similar strategy to passivization in English.

o trei fid kedrei re tän ši do min
this woman past.prog cook some meat for that child
"This woman was cooking some meat for that child"

re tän ko, xou fid kedrei ši do min
some meat TOP, one past.prog cook for that child
"Some meat was being cooked for that child"

ši do min ko, xou fid kedrei re tän
for that child TOP, one past.prog cook some meat
"That child was being cooked some meat"



ALRIIIIIIGHT. Ok, let's see how this turns out...