Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Hooked o's and stuff.

Expand Messages
  • Lars Finsen
    Hi, I ve been struggling to find a way to put a hooked o with an acute accent on a webpage. It seems Unicode has add-on accents of various sorts, but they
    Message 1 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi,
      I've been struggling to find a way to put a hooked o with an acute
      accent on a webpage. It seems Unicode has add-on accents of various
      sorts, but they don't work in my browsers. So I wonder, do you have
      any advice?

      LEF
    • Mark J. Reed
      Get a better browser? :). Seriously, what platform are you using? Combining-character support has come more slowly than other aspects of Unicode because it s
      Message 2 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Get a better browser? :).

        Seriously, what platform are you using?

        Combining-character support has come more slowly than other aspects of
        Unicode because it's so tricky to get right.



        On 10/5/08, Lars Finsen <lars.finsen@...> wrote:
        > Hi,
        > I've been struggling to find a way to put a hooked o with an acute
        > accent on a webpage. It seems Unicode has add-on accents of various
        > sorts, but they don't work in my browsers. So I wonder, do you have
        > any advice?
        >
        > LEF
        >

        --
        Sent from Gmail for mobile | mobile.google.com

        Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
      • Lars Finsen
        ... I have both a Mac and a Windows machine online, but my Linux machine isn t online yet. Safari and IE both render the hooked o with a horizontal line above
        Message 3 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Den 5. okt. 2008 kl. 13.43 skreiv Mark J. Reed:

          > Get a better browser? :).
          >
          > Seriously, what platform are you using?

          I have both a Mac and a Windows machine online, but my Linux machine
          isn't online yet. Safari and IE both render the hooked o with a
          horizontal line above and the acute slashed o, while Firefox renders
          none of them. Safari shows the add-on accents that it cannot combine,
          while it seems IE misinterprets them. As usual, Safari is the best of
          the three. But not good enough. Neither of them make the IPA
          characters look good either.

          I'm working on the Azurian phonology now. If you have a better
          browser, you can test it on the (sketchy) page: http://www.ortygia.no/
          uriania/azuriansk-gmp-eng.html

          LEF
        • Mark J. Reed
          ... I thought it was clear, but I was kidding. I don t think any browsers have full support for combining characters yet. You can use the page at
          Message 4 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 8:33 AM, Lars Finsen <lars.finsen@...> wrote:
            > Den 5. okt. 2008 kl. 13.43 skreiv Mark J. Reed:
            >
            >> Get a better browser? :)

            I thought it was clear, but I was kidding. I don't think any browsers
            have full support for combining characters yet. You can use the page
            at http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/combining_diacritical_marks.html to
            test different browsers against each other and spot the weaknesses,
            but if you want it to look right on the web right now you may need to
            render to PDF or something.

            Oddly enough, such characters work just fine in iTerm on my Mac. How
            sad is it when the terminal emulator does a better job than a GUI of
            rendering some category of "fancy" text? :)


            > As usual, Safari is the best of the three.

            If Safari works best on the Mac, you might want to try Google Chrome
            on Windows and Konqueror on Linux, since they're based on the same
            rendering engine.

            --
            Mark J. Reed <markjreed@...>
          • Ina van der Vegt
            On my Linux/KDE + Firefox I see two hooked o s, one with a horizontal line (ON Phone, bottom row) and one with an accent acute (ON Letter, bottom row), as it
            Message 5 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              On my Linux/KDE + Firefox I see two hooked 'o's, one with a horizontal
              line (ON Phone, bottom row) and one with an accent acute (ON Letter,
              bottom row), as it sounds like it should. Same result for Linux/KDE +
              Konqueror

              2008/10/5 Lars Finsen <lars.finsen@...>:
              > Den 5. okt. 2008 kl. 13.43 skreiv Mark J. Reed:
              >
              >> Get a better browser? :).
              >>
              >> Seriously, what platform are you using?
              >
              > I have both a Mac and a Windows machine online, but my Linux machine isn't
              > online yet. Safari and IE both render the hooked o with a horizontal line
              > above and the acute slashed o, while Firefox renders none of them. Safari
              > shows the add-on accents that it cannot combine, while it seems IE
              > misinterprets them. As usual, Safari is the best of the three. But not good
              > enough. Neither of them make the IPA characters look good either.
              >
              > I'm working on the Azurian phonology now. If you have a better browser, you
              > can test it on the (sketchy) page:
              > http://www.ortygia.no/uriania/azuriansk-gmp-eng.html
              >
              > LEF
              >
            • deinx nxtxr
              ... The only combining problems I ve seen with it so far with anything that I have is with the Tibetan script, even though the other Brahmi scripts are fine.
              Message 6 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                > [mailto:CONLANG@...] On Behalf Of Mark J. Reed

                > Get a better browser? :).
                >
                > Seriously, what platform are you using?
                >
                > Combining-character support has come more slowly than other aspects of
                > Unicode because it's so tricky to get right.

                The only combining problems I've seen with it so far with anything that I have is with the Tibetan script, even though the other Brahmi scripts are fine. I'm not sure but I sometimes wonder if it's not because it's intended to be a top-to-bottom script. The combining diacritics for Roman have always worked fine for me using IE, Mozilla, Firefox, and common MS Office applications.
              • Lars Finsen
                ... Very good. I guess all the other horizontal lines are in their proper places as well, otherwise you would have mentioned them. That means Linux users can
                Message 7 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  Den 5. okt. 2008 kl. 15.01 skreiv Ina van der Vegt:

                  > On my Linux/KDE + Firefox I see two hooked 'o's, one with a horizontal
                  > line (ON Phone, bottom row) and one with an accent acute (ON Letter,
                  > bottom row), as it sounds like it should. Same result for Linux/KDE +
                  > Konqueror

                  Very good. I guess all the other horizontal lines are in their proper
                  places as well, otherwise you would have mentioned them. That means
                  Linux users can see my pages as they should, while everybody else
                  cannot. Which means also that everybody should convert to Linux.
                  Right now.

                  (BTW: You're not related to Wopke, are you?)

                  I guess I shall have to visit some other phonetic pages and see how
                  it can be done.

                  LEF
                • Herman Miller
                  ... All the characters are readable (or seem so at least) on my Windows XP with Firefox 3.0.1. It may depend on which fonts you have available and which
                  Message 8 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Lars Finsen wrote:
                    > Den 5. okt. 2008 kl. 13.43 skreiv Mark J. Reed:
                    >
                    >> Get a better browser? :).
                    >>
                    >> Seriously, what platform are you using?
                    >
                    > I have both a Mac and a Windows machine online, but my Linux machine
                    > isn't online yet. Safari and IE both render the hooked o with a
                    > horizontal line above and the acute slashed o, while Firefox renders
                    > none of them. Safari shows the add-on accents that it cannot combine,
                    > while it seems IE misinterprets them. As usual, Safari is the best of
                    > the three. But not good enough. Neither of them make the IPA characters
                    > look good either.
                    >
                    > I'm working on the Azurian phonology now. If you have a better browser,
                    > you can test it on the (sketchy) page:
                    > http://www.ortygia.no/uriania/azuriansk-gmp-eng.html
                    >
                    > LEF

                    All the characters are readable (or seem so at least) on my Windows XP
                    with Firefox 3.0.1. It may depend on which fonts you have available and
                    which version of Uniscribe is installed on your Windows system (assuming
                    that your browser uses Uniscribe to display text). The acute accent on
                    the hooked o is a little off, but it's still visible. You could include
                    a list of suggested fonts (e.g. Aboriginal Serif, Charis SIL, Gentium)
                    in a style sheet for browsers that might not default to a suitable font.
                    I don't think there's much you can do about the lack of mark positioning
                    in early versions of Uniscribe, except to look for a font that by chance
                    has the combining marks in a position that looks good. (As far as Mac
                    browsers, I don't have any familarity with them.)
                  • Lars Finsen
                    ... All the browsers except MS Internet Explorer manage to show the accents. The main problem is that they re off. An oacute with added- on hook doesn t work
                    Message 9 of 20 , Oct 5, 2008
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Den 5. okt. 2008 kl. 23.33 skreiv Herman Miller:

                      > All the characters are readable (or seem so at least) on my Windows
                      > XP with Firefox 3.0.1. It may depend on which fonts you have
                      > available and which version of Uniscribe is installed on your
                      > Windows system (assuming that your browser uses Uniscribe to
                      > display text). The acute accent on the hooked o is a little off,
                      > but it's still visible.

                      All the browsers except MS Internet Explorer manage to show the
                      accents. The main problem is that they're off. An oacute with added-
                      on hook doesn't work either.

                      > You could include a list of suggested fonts (e.g. Aboriginal Serif,
                      > Charis SIL, Gentium) in a style sheet for browsers that might not
                      > default to a suitable font. I don't think there's much you can do
                      > about the lack of mark positioning in early versions of Uniscribe,
                      > except to look for a font that by chance has the combining marks in
                      > a position that looks good.

                      Yes, possibly another font will fix something, thanks for the
                      suggestion. Still, maybe SAMPA is the best way to go after all.

                      LEF
                    • Daniel Prohaska
                      Dear all, I m currently developing a conlang family of a population that migrated out of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia, the Balkans, along
                      Message 10 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear all,

                        I'm currently developing a conlang family of a population that migrated out
                        of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia, the Balkans, along the
                        Danube, then into what is southern France today across the Pyrenees, then
                        towards the southern tip of the Iberian peninsular. Then they develop
                        seafaring capabilities, settle on the Canary Islands and from then on become
                        a kind of Atlantic version of a Polynesian-type spread across the isles of
                        the Atlantic. This migration goes on between 35 000 and 20 000 years ago.
                        The language will be more or less from scratch, but I want to incorporate
                        Nostratic and Old European loan words. I would also be interested in any
                        conlang that has been constructed for a similar time frame and area that
                        "my" population could have come in contact with. I would like to incorporate
                        culture-specific loan words that are not already "coloured" by my own ideas,
                        to give them a fresh, "foreign" feel.

                        I'd appreciate any feedback and ideas in the matter. I've got some rough
                        ideas on the basic phonology and a Swadesch list that I'll post in the near
                        future.

                        Dan
                      • Lars Finsen
                        ... I do have something from that time-frame, a paleolithic culture in Uriania. But in terms of language I have only a mythical ruler-list, reproduced at:
                        Message 11 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Den 7. okt. 2008 kl. 11.47 skreiv Daniel Prohaska:

                          > I'm currently developing a conlang family of a population that
                          > migrated out of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia,
                          > the Balkans, along the Danube, then into what is southern France
                          > today across the Pyrenees, then towards the southern tip of the
                          > Iberian peninsular. Then they develop seafaring capabilities,
                          > settle on the Canary Islands and from then on become a kind of
                          > Atlantic version of a Polynesian-type spread across the isles of
                          > the Atlantic. This migration goes on between 35 000 and 20 000
                          > years ago.
                          > The language will be more or less from scratch, but I want to
                          > incorporate Nostratic and Old European loan words. I would also be
                          > interested in any conlang that has been constructed for a similar
                          > time frame and area that "my" population could have come in contact
                          > with. I would like to incorporate culture-specific loan words that
                          > are not already "coloured" by my own ideas, to give them a fresh,
                          > "foreign" feel.

                          I do have something from that time-frame, a paleolithic culture in
                          Uriania. But in terms of language I have only a mythical ruler-list,
                          reproduced at: http://www.ortygia.no/uriania/eldresteinalder-eng.html

                          The only word with a known meaning I have from their language(s) as
                          yet is "ti", which means 'land'. But it should be possible to
                          reconstruct some more from the name list, and from some historical
                          notes that I have.

                          I love the idea of borrowing from each other's conlangs in cases
                          where the cultures are adjacent in physical time and space. I
                          probably should steal something from Jörg, as the peoples in Uriania
                          of different ages have been neighbours to his, but perhaps I should
                          ask permission first.

                          LEF
                        • Carl Banks
                          ... I think that s stretching it a bit. If the Nostratic hypothesis is correct, you re still looking at only, at the very limits of credulity, 12000 years
                          Message 12 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Daniel Prohaska wrote:
                            > Dear all,
                            >
                            > I'm currently developing a conlang family of a population that migrated out
                            > of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia, the Balkans, along the
                            > Danube, then into what is southern France today across the Pyrenees, then
                            > towards the southern tip of the Iberian peninsular. Then they develop
                            > seafaring capabilities, settle on the Canary Islands and from then on become
                            > a kind of Atlantic version of a Polynesian-type spread across the isles of
                            > the Atlantic. This migration goes on between 35 000 and 20 000 years ago.
                            > The language will be more or less from scratch, but I want to incorporate
                            > Nostratic and Old European loan words.

                            I think that's stretching it a bit. If the Nostratic hypothesis is
                            correct, you're still looking at only, at the very limits of credulity,
                            12000 years ago. Now double that to get into the time frame you're
                            looking at. If you're going for realism you're going to have to borrow
                            from pre-pre-pre-pre-pre-Nostratic.

                            So, I guess start with some Nostratic, IE, Uralic, or whatever roots and
                            start postulating some sound changes and see what you come up with. It
                            might be cool if you can "solve" a puzzle or show a heretofore unknown
                            "relationship" between two roots. Then borrow it into your own conlang.

                            As for Old European (I assume you mean the languages spoken in Europe
                            before Indo-European languages took over), there's even less to work
                            with. Basque and Iberian are the only such attested languages I'm aware
                            of. However, there might be some Celtic and Berber borrowings, and I
                            remember one odd theory that some river names were borrowed from earlier
                            languages. So, maybe find a Celtic word of obscure, probably non-IE
                            origin, and postulate to be a borrowing from an earlier Druidic
                            language, throw in a couple sound changes for realism, and look, it also
                            shows up in your conlang.


                            > I would also be interested in any
                            > conlang that has been constructed for a similar time frame and area that
                            > "my" population could have come in contact with. I would like to incorporate
                            > culture-specific loan words that are not already "coloured" by my own ideas,
                            > to give them a fresh, "foreign" feel.

                            Can't help you there; my language exists on a fictional Old World
                            continent west of Europe in the year 1234, and the continent has all
                            kinds of weird stuff like telepathic fairies who run a major
                            telecommunications network. So not very realistic.

                            Actually it probably is related to some Old European languages, but it
                            evolved into something that looks like a lot like sound changes applied
                            to random syllables. But I'd be happy to supply you a few random words
                            and what they evolved into.


                            > I'd appreciate any feedback and ideas in the matter. I've got some rough
                            > ideas on the basic phonology and a Swadesch list that I'll post in the near
                            > future.

                            Sounds interesting. Good luck


                            Carl Banks
                          • Jörg Rhiemeier
                            Hallo! ... I am generally open minded towards cooperating with other conlangers if the cooperation makes sense. One problem with borrowing vocabulary from
                            Message 13 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hallo!

                              On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:12:24 +0200, Lars Finsen wrote:

                              > Den 7. okt. 2008 kl. 11.47 skreiv Daniel Prohaska:
                              >
                              > > I'm currently developing a conlang family of a population that
                              > > migrated out of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia,
                              > > the Balkans, along the Danube, then into what is southern France
                              > > today across the Pyrenees, then towards the southern tip of the
                              > > Iberian peninsular. Then they develop seafaring capabilities,
                              > > settle on the Canary Islands and from then on become a kind of
                              > > Atlantic version of a Polynesian-type spread across the isles of
                              > > the Atlantic. This migration goes on between 35 000 and 20 000
                              > > years ago.
                              > > The language will be more or less from scratch, but I want to
                              > > incorporate Nostratic and Old European loan words. I would also be
                              > > interested in any conlang that has been constructed for a similar
                              > > time frame and area that "my" population could have come in contact
                              > > with. I would like to incorporate culture-specific loan words that
                              > > are not already "coloured" by my own ideas, to give them a fresh,
                              > > "foreign" feel.
                              >
                              > I do have something from that time-frame, a paleolithic culture in
                              > Uriania. But in terms of language I have only a mythical ruler-list,
                              > reproduced at: http://www.ortygia.no/uriania/eldresteinalder-eng.html
                              >
                              > The only word with a known meaning I have from their language(s) as
                              > yet is "ti", which means 'land'. But it should be possible to
                              > reconstruct some more from the name list, and from some historical
                              > notes that I have.
                              >
                              > I love the idea of borrowing from each other's conlangs in cases
                              > where the cultures are adjacent in physical time and space. I
                              > probably should steal something from Jörg, as the peoples in Uriania
                              > of different ages have been neighbours to his, but perhaps I should
                              > ask permission first.

                              I am generally open minded towards cooperating with other
                              conlangers if the cooperation makes sense. One problem with
                              borrowing vocabulary from Albic is a technical one: there still
                              isn't much online simply because it is not sufficiently worked
                              out. An Old Albic thematic dictionary is currently under
                              construction.

                              It also depends on who was where at which time. I fancy
                              the ancestors of the Elves hailing from the area where now is
                              the Bay of Odessa, fleeing west from the Black Sea Flood (which
                              is now dated to 6700 BC) and arriving in Britain around 1800 BC.
                              That's much later than the migrations of Daniel's people;
                              however, Albic may contain words picked up from Paleolithic
                              Europeans on the way, especially terms relating to local wildlife.

                              As for "Old European", frustratingly little is known about it.
                              One way of finding possible Old European words is this: take
                              an etymological dictionary of a Germanic language, and search
                              it for words without etymologies reaching deeper than Germanic.
                              You will find quite a few - about a third of Germanic vocabulary
                              has no known Indo-European roots and may be borrowed from pre-IE
                              languages of central Europe. This includes, for instance, quite
                              a few nautical terms, includig such basics as "sea", "ship",
                              "mast" and "sail".

                              ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                            • ROGER MILLS
                              ... Between the Canaries and the Caribbean area, I don t think the Atlantic is very well supplied with islands.... Oh well ;-) This migration goes on between
                              Message 14 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Daniel Prohaska wrote:
                                >Dear all,
                                >
                                >I'm currently developing a conlang family of a population that migrated out
                                >of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia, the Balkans, along
                                >the
                                >Danube, then into what is southern France today across the Pyrenees, then
                                >towards the southern tip of the Iberian peninsular. Then they develop
                                >seafaring capabilities, settle on the Canary Islands and from then on
                                >become
                                >a kind of Atlantic version of a Polynesian-type spread across the isles of
                                >the Atlantic.

                                Between the Canaries and the Caribbean area, I don't think the Atlantic is
                                very well supplied with islands.... Oh well ;-)

                                This migration goes on between 35 000 and 20 000 years ago.
                                >The language will be more or less from scratch, but I want to incorporate
                                >Nostratic and Old European loan words.

                                If you're a reader of Cybalist (devoted to Indo-European), you may be
                                familiar with Patrick Ryan, who claims to be reconstructing THE
                                Proto-Language (as I gather, the ancestor of Nostratic itself). I don't have
                                his URL but could find it. His work and theories are sufficiently
                                off-the-wall that, as some of his detractors claim, "Proto-Language" might
                                well be considered a conlang :-))))

                                Another controversial participant there is Torsten Pedersen (sp.?) who often
                                cites "Old European" material obtained (as far as I understand it) from
                                materials by Hans Kuhn and perhaps others. It's difficult to tell, but I
                                gather the time frame is prior to the IE-ization of Europe, and it's
                                possible "Old European" is actually a dialect of IE. There's also mention of
                                the "river-names" and "bird-names" languages (which may actually be Old
                                Eur.), the evidence for all these lies in words that fail to exhibit
                                expected sound changes in Germanic and/or Latin.
                              • Jörg Rhiemeier
                                Hallo! ... And not even a good naturalistic one :( ... Indeed, you meet all sorts of crackpots and speculators in this field. The real scholars tend to be
                                Message 15 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Hallo!

                                  On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:11:59 -0400, ROGER MILLS wrote:

                                  > If you're a reader of Cybalist (devoted to Indo-European), you may be
                                  > familiar with Patrick Ryan, who claims to be reconstructing THE
                                  > Proto-Language (as I gather, the ancestor of Nostratic itself). I don't have
                                  > his URL but could find it. His work and theories are sufficiently
                                  > off-the-wall that, as some of his detractors claim, "Proto-Language" might
                                  > well be considered a conlang :-))))

                                  And not even a good naturalistic one :(

                                  > Another controversial participant there is Torsten Pedersen (sp.?) who often
                                  > cites "Old European" material obtained (as far as I understand it) from
                                  > materials by Hans Kuhn and perhaps others. It's difficult to tell, but I
                                  > gather the time frame is prior to the IE-ization of Europe, and it's
                                  > possible "Old European" is actually a dialect of IE. There's also mention of
                                  > the "river-names" and "bird-names" languages (which may actually be Old
                                  > Eur.), the evidence for all these lies in words that fail to exhibit
                                  > expected sound changes in Germanic and/or Latin.

                                  Indeed, you meet all sorts of crackpots and speculators in this
                                  field. The real scholars tend to be silent on the issue because
                                  they are very aware of the fact that we know virtually nothing
                                  about those languages and everything one could say about them
                                  is necessarily speculative in nature.

                                  The late, lamented Hans Krahe, who laid the foundation of the
                                  study of the "Old European hydronymy" (a network of apparently
                                  recurring river names spanning most of western Europe), assumed
                                  that those river names were IE, but while there appear to be
                                  IE etymologies for them that semantically even make some sense,
                                  they seem not to have undergone the same sound changes as the
                                  inherited words of the languages in which they are attested, so
                                  they must be borrowed. One phonological problem is that the
                                  river names show the un-IE vowel /a/ where PIE has *e or *o.

                                  Another scholar, Theo Vennemann, assumes the names are from
                                  sister languages of Basque, but his etymologies are even more
                                  shaky than Krahe's, and the Old European hydronymy apparently
                                  shows a gap between the Garonne and Ebro rivers, i.e. in the
                                  *only* area of which we *know* that Basque or something related
                                  to it was ever spoken in history.

                                  My personal hypothesis is that the Old European hydronymy is
                                  from a sister language of PIE, which split off before the
                                  system of PIE ablaut developed, at a time when pre-PIE had a
                                  three-vowel system centred on */a/ (the other vowels were the
                                  less frequent */i/ and */u/).

                                  Of course, we as conlangers may play with these hypotheses.
                                  My Albic conlang family is meant to represent a surviving
                                  offshot of the "peri-IE" language of my hypothesis.

                                  ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                                • Benct Philip Jonsson
                                  ... Which means you can borrow from IE when you feel like that, and roll your own when you feel like that! :-) I ve never tried an a-posteriori histlang with
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Oct 7, 2008
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On 2008-10-07 Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                                    > Of course, we as conlangers may play with these hypotheses.
                                    > My Albic conlang family is meant to represent a surviving
                                    > offshot of the "peri-IE" language of my hypothesis.

                                    Which means you can borrow from IE when you feel
                                    like that, and roll your own when you feel like that! :-)

                                    I've never tried an a-posteriori histlang with such a
                                    long timeframe, mostly because I'm deeply sceptical
                                    about such 'deep' reconstructions -- essentially
                                    secondary reconstructions from already reconstructed
                                    languages -- and hence am concerned about realism.

                                    WRT Krahe he apparently was a highly gifted scholar
                                    who ruined his reputation with what my professor
                                    called "his Illyromania and that Old European
                                    business". IMO they are probable -- much more
                                    probable than Vennemann's -- but unprovable
                                    hypotheses; choice meat for conlanging that is!


                                    /BP 8^)>
                                    --
                                    Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch atte melroch dotte se
                                    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                    "C'est en vain que nos Josués littéraires crient
                                    à la langue de s'arrêter; les langues ni le soleil
                                    ne s'arrêtent plus. Le jour où elles se *fixent*,
                                    c'est qu'elles meurent." (Victor Hugo)
                                  • Jörg Rhiemeier
                                    Hallo! ... Indeed. The lexicon of Old Albic contains a few IE cognates, a few items from Germanic without good IE etymologies, and many a priori words. And
                                    Message 17 of 20 , Oct 8, 2008
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Hallo!

                                      On Wed, 8 Oct 2008 08:39:28 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:

                                      > On 2008-10-07 Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:
                                      > > Of course, we as conlangers may play with these hypotheses.
                                      > > My Albic conlang family is meant to represent a surviving
                                      > > offshot of the "peri-IE" language of my hypothesis.
                                      >
                                      > Which means you can borrow from IE when you feel
                                      > like that, and roll your own when you feel like that! :-)

                                      Indeed. The lexicon of Old Albic contains a few IE cognates,
                                      a few items from Germanic without good IE etymologies, and
                                      many a priori words. And because the sound correspondences
                                      between IE and Albic, as I use them, are reminiscent of
                                      Grimm's Law (i.e., PIE *p corresponds to PA *ph, PIE *b
                                      to PA *p, and PIE *bh to PA *b; accordingly for dentals
                                      and velars), I even can use Germanic words with uncertain
                                      IE etymologies without having to decide whether they are
                                      IE or "Old European", as both options yield the same Albic
                                      form!

                                      > I've never tried an a-posteriori histlang with such a
                                      > long timeframe, mostly because I'm deeply sceptical
                                      > about such 'deep' reconstructions -- essentially
                                      > secondary reconstructions from already reconstructed
                                      > languages -- and hence am concerned about realism.

                                      Yes: reconstructions are always shaky, thus a reconstruction
                                      based on reconstructions is doubly shaky. Our model of PIE
                                      probably contains elements that never existed at the same
                                      time, and with internal reconstruction, this problem is
                                      aggravated. As a conlanger, however, you can use such a
                                      reconstruction, as long as it makes sense and looks like a
                                      plausible language, to develop a conlang from it.

                                      > WRT Krahe he apparently was a highly gifted scholar
                                      > who ruined his reputation with what my professor
                                      > called "his Illyromania and that Old European
                                      > business". IMO they are probable -- much more
                                      > probable than Vennemann's -- but unprovable
                                      > hypotheses; choice meat for conlanging that is!

                                      Right. Krahe produced, among other valuable contributions
                                      to IE historical linguistics, a widely used handbook of PIE,
                                      but later jeopardized his reputation with his speculations
                                      on "Old European". As I pointed out earlier in this thread,
                                      while his etymologies seem to make sense, the names do not
                                      show the expected sound correspondences (especially the
                                      vowels are very odd) and must therefore be borrowed from
                                      an unknown language rather than inherited from PIE (and
                                      Krahe's conclusion that PIE was spoken in western Europe
                                      is groundless). It is a similar story as with Greenberg,
                                      who won a great reputation with his brilliant typological
                                      work, and lost it again with his speculations on "Eurasiatic"
                                      and "Amerind".

                                      Yet, Vennemann's hypothesis only makes things worse.
                                      The semantics are problematic: you get names meaning
                                      "Wet River" and all that. There is not a shred of
                                      evidence that "Vasconic" was ever that widespread,
                                      and as I already said, the Old European hydronymy shows
                                      a gap in the precise area where Basque is historically
                                      attested. Vennemann also tends to re-etymologize names
                                      which are perfectly transparent, such as the place names
                                      _Ebersberg_ 'boar's hill' and _Bischofsheim_ 'bishop's
                                      homestead'.

                                      And perhaps, the whole "Old European hydronymy" business
                                      is really just coincidence and pure crap. But as long
                                      as we don't know, we as conlangers can play with such
                                      speculations with impunity.

                                      ... brought to you by the Weeping Elf
                                    • Daniel Prohaska
                                      Thanks for everyone s feedback on the topic. I will consider pushing forward the time frame to a more recent date of ca. 15 000 years ago. Lack of Atlantic
                                      Message 18 of 20 , Oct 9, 2008
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        Thanks for everyone's feedback on the topic. I will consider pushing forward
                                        the time frame to a more recent date of ca. 15 000 years ago. Lack of
                                        Atlantic islands in comparison to the Pacific is hardly a problem in a
                                        conworld, after all we have the North Atlantic Ridge which could
                                        "conworldly" have been jutting up a little further to give a wide variety of
                                        Atlantic archipelagos. Anyway, thanks again, you've given me food for
                                        thought.

                                        Dan
                                      • Lars Finsen
                                        ... I m sceptical, too. But nevertheless I am somewhat attracted to this kind of reconstructions. They won t ever be able to reconstruct any of the
                                        Message 19 of 20 , Oct 9, 2008
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Jörg Rhiemeier wrote:

                                          > quoting Benct Philip Jonsson:
                                          >
                                          >> I've never tried an a-posteriori histlang with such a
                                          >> long timeframe, mostly because I'm deeply sceptical
                                          >> about such 'deep' reconstructions -- essentially
                                          >> secondary reconstructions from already reconstructed
                                          >> languages -- and hence am concerned about realism.
                                          >
                                          > Yes: reconstructions are always shaky, thus a reconstruction
                                          > based on reconstructions is doubly shaky. Our model of PIE
                                          > probably contains elements that never existed at the same
                                          > time, and with internal reconstruction, this problem is
                                          > aggravated. As a conlanger, however, you can use such a
                                          > reconstruction, as long as it makes sense and looks like a
                                          > plausible language, to develop a conlang from it.

                                          I'm sceptical, too. But nevertheless I am somewhat attracted to this
                                          kind of reconstructions. They won't ever be able to reconstruct any
                                          of the proto-languages they are aiming for with any degree of
                                          exactness, probably, but it seems to be possible to arrive at some
                                          kind of approximation, which can form a basis for further refinement.
                                          Anyway it's better than not making the attempt at all.

                                          > Right. Krahe produced, among other valuable contributions
                                          > to IE historical linguistics, a widely used handbook of PIE,
                                          > but later jeopardized his reputation with his speculations
                                          > on "Old European". As I pointed out earlier in this thread,
                                          > while his etymologies seem to make sense, the names do not
                                          > show the expected sound correspondences (especially the
                                          > vowels are very odd) and must therefore be borrowed from
                                          > an unknown language rather than inherited from PIE (and
                                          > Krahe's conclusion that PIE was spoken in western Europe
                                          > is groundless). It is a similar story as with Greenberg,
                                          > who won a great reputation with his brilliant typological
                                          > work, and lost it again with his speculations on "Eurasiatic"
                                          > and "Amerind".

                                          I like that. My kind of guys. Reputation is overrated.

                                          LEF
                                        • John Vertical
                                          ... That s quite the odyssey there. Do you want to derive this out of something like Pre-Proto-Nilo-Afrasian, or is there some other reason (genetical?) you re
                                          Message 20 of 20 , Oct 14, 2008
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            >I'm currently developing a conlang family of a population that migrated out
                                            >of eastern Africa, through the Middle East, Anatolia, the Balkans, along the
                                            >Danube, then into what is southern France today across the Pyrenees, then
                                            >towards the southern tip of the Iberian peninsular.

                                            >Dan

                                            That's quite the odyssey there. Do you want to derive this out of something
                                            like Pre-Proto-Nilo-Afrasian, or is there some other reason (genetical?)
                                            you're having them take such a long detour, & not just saying they are just
                                            another Old European group that has vanished from our history?

                                            Flat-out language change might be more likely than simple adaptation of
                                            loanwords, if they're going to plow thru the entire Europe, at least if this
                                            is supposed to be a single population rather than part of a wider radiation.

                                            John Vertical
                                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.