199207Re: Introducing myself and my half-baked language
- Oct 20, 2013On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 05:25:56 -0300, Vítor De Araújo <vbuaraujo@...> wrote:
>Hello, conlangers!Welcome! I also studied some computer science as an undergrad, though I've drifted over to maths now.
>I have been lurking on the list for a month or so and reading the
>archives, and I thought I might introduce myself. I am a Computer
>Science undergrad student. I have little formal study in Linguistics,
>but I have been reading about languages and Linguistics on the web and
>occasionally books quite a bit since I was 15 (I'm 22 now), and I did
>one semester and a half of a Language and Literature / Japanese major
>where I had some Linguistics courses before leaving for Computer
>Vreksi [...] I will describeThere's a lot to like here. Some of my favourite bits that I don't further comment on below are the interaction of the mobile particles with affixal case, and the breeakdown of the plural pronouns.
>what I have currently. It is going through a lot of reformulation
>recently, so the following explanation includes a lot of "this used to
>be this way but I'm thinking about changing it to that way".
>Suggestions are of course welcome.
>Vowels may also be "marked" or "unmarked". In the original project ofTone, being extremely suprasegmental, is more liable to get used for purely syntactic functions (like marking out the verb) than length is, certainly.
>the language this distinction was one of length, but I'm not sure
>anymore; I have been thinking about high vs. non-high tone. This
>distinction is employed grammatically. In general, a vowel must be
>stressed for it to be marked.
>There is also the curious case of /ks/, which II don't think it's too weird. It wouldn't be so hard to arrange that /ks/ is the only relict of former more general clusters involving a stop coda, most of which have historically decayed into something else. (Though in that case I'd be curious where /ps/ went.)
>have been meaning to remove from the language but I am not sure. [Is it
>too weird to forbid stops in the coda _except_ in one single
>Nominative is unmarked. The original accusative was marked with "-mo".Interesting. I wonder whether _-le_ has some other uses with e.g. more comitative shading. Participatory patients alone seems like a relatively small portfolio for a case affix, especially in a language that's moving in the direction of loosening (?) its case affixes to particles.
>I have recently been playing with the idea of having two accusatives:
>one for when the patient has some kind of participation or volition in
>the action ("-le") and one when not ("-mo"). Inanimates usually always
>take "-mo", but people and other animate beings may take either
>depending on the situation. The distinction is somewhat subtle. So, for
>example, "me sele kīsta" means "I kissed her/him (with her/his
>consent)", while "me semo kīsta" would be a "stolen kiss".
On similar lines, agency contrasts on the A are more common than on the P, as far as I know. How do agents behave in Vreksi with respect to volition? "I [accidentally] broke the table" and all that.
>VerbsYou seem to have a whole lot of verb stems ending in _s_ (of the verbs you mentioned here just _gwēl-_ and _fūlv-_ don't, if I've segmented out the latter right). Is there something behind that?
For that matter, presumably there's some (morpho)phonological rule that fixes up _fūlv·ta_ phonotactically...
>I am thinking about killing the separate tense/aspect marking, at leastIt is certainly uncommon to have orthogonal tense and aspect systems, though far from unheard of.
>in its current form. "-ta" is in the process of becoming a "perfect
>aspect, implied past unless combined with other tense morpheme like
>Incidentally, "-wes" comes from the verb 'wēse' "to intend".How about _-wos_? Is that derived from an ablaut variant of _wēse_ (and if so does that stem survive)? or is it derived from _-wes_ rather than primarily from a verb? or just accidentally similar? or?
>Adjectives are really intransitive verbs. There is a special(But you don't write _gwélea_?)
>attributive form (a kind of participle) for verbs:
> se gwēle (it is green)
> gwelea talpa (green table; stress falls on "gwe")
Can all verbs be attributivised? Can clauses of more than a single verbal word be attributivised too? -- this could well be useful in a reform of relative clauses.
>There is a system of "lenition" (phonologically rather thanWhat do other leniting consonante lenite into? /m/ to /w/ is sensible on its own (reminds me a little of Hittite /w/ > /m/ near /u/). But if this were a process of broad applicability I'd expect that place would be more readily dissimilating than manner, I think. E.g. crosslinguistically, the phenomenon that CVC roots disprefer homorganic consonants are common, but for manner I don't know any cases.
>grammatically conditioned) to avoid sequences of the form "CV₁-CV₂"
>across morphemes, where C is the same consonant (the vowels may or may
>not be the same). This can be seen in "me" (I) + "-mo" (acc.) = "mewo".
>I haven't fleshed this out yet, though. In particular, the conditions
>that trigger this are not well defined.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>