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

New Conlang: Terkunan

Expand Messages
  • theiling@absint.com
    Hi! I would like to announce my new romlang Terkunan [tErku nan] or Tarragonian . It was designed to be what I feel is an elegant romlang derived from Vulgar
    Message 1 of 8 , Mar 2, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi!

      I would like to announce my new romlang Terkunan [tErku'nan] or
      'Tarragonian'. It was designed to be what I feel is an elegant
      romlang derived from Vulgar Latin. In contrast to Þrjótrunn, there is
      not one strict set of sound changes taken from another existing
      natlang, but a set compiled by my personal preferences. (Are there
      names to distinguish these two types of conlangs?)

      Some sound changes:

      - drop of initial unstressed i-: imperium > mperi
      - drop of final vowels: panem > pan
      - no palatalisation: caelum > kel
      - l > r shifts: blancum > branke
      - syncope: hominem > ombre
      - r..r dissimilation: regnum > ringle
      - epenthesis: insula > istre

      The idea that started this conlang was a vowel shift, namely the
      collapse of the Vulgar Latin seven vowel system of /a e E i o O u/
      into /a e i o u/. The collapsed happened in several steps:

      In Vulgar Roman times, the seven vowel system acquired a new
      non-phonemic length in open syllables. This length distinction then
      influenced how the seven phonemic vowels collapsed into five: /e:/ and
      /E:/ both collapsed into /e:/ = [e:] (and /o:/ and /O:/ into /o:/ = [o:]).
      And both /i/ and /e/ collapsed into /i/ = [I] (and /u/ and /o/ into
      /u/ = [U]). The pronunciation of the phones today is just like in
      Classical Latin again, only length is now non-phonemically selected by
      openness of the syllable:

      /e:/ [e:]
      /e/ [E]
      /i:/ [i:]
      /i/ [I]
      ...

      This leads to the following modern words (it's all about the first
      vowel in each word here):

      fe:mina > fimbre [fImbre] classical [e:] in closed syl. => modern 'i'
      fe:li:cem > felike [felike] classical [e:] is open syl. => modern 'e'
      sexa > ses [sEs] classical [E] in closed syl. => modern 'e'
      decem > deke [deke] classical [E] in open syl. => modern 'e'

      Because of this, some words will probably have irregular i-e or u-o
      alterations in derivations or in the plural (but I have no examples
      yet) when the openness of syllables changes.

      A first sketch is here (including grammar which I neglected in this
      post):

      http://www.kunstsprachen.de/s25/


      And here's the first text:

      Mis Patre [mIs 'patre]

      Mis patre, k'es n'kels, [mIs 'patre 'kes N=kEls]
      Es bendika tu nombre. ['es bEn'dika tu 'nOmbre]
      Vena tu ringle. ['vena tu 'rINgle]
      Es fika tu volat, ['es 'fika tu vo'lat]
      Komu n'kel si n'ter. ['komuN kEl sin tEr]
      Odiu dar a mis le mis pan ['odju da ra mIs le mIs pan
      pe katu di. pe 'katu di]
      I perdonar a mis le mis devats, [i pEr'dona ra mIs le mIs de'vats]
      Si komu mis perdonar ils a [si 'komu mIs pEr'dona rIl sa
      mis devators. mIs de'vatOrs]
      I no nduka mis n'tentasion, [i nOn 'duka mIs n=tEnta'sjOn]
      Ma libera mis de mal. [ma li'bera mIs de mal]
      Ka de tu es ringle i pot i glori, [ka de tu es 'rINgle i pOt i 'glori]
      In eterne, [In e'tErne]
      Amin. [a'mIn]

      What do you think?

      **Henrik
    • Padraic Brown
      ... I might suggest Historical Conlang (derived from historical novel ) because these particular languages are based on historical models and primary world
      Message 2 of 8 , Mar 2, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        --- theiling@... wrote:

        > Hi!
        >
        > I would like to announce my new romlang
        > Terkunan [tErku'nan] or
        > 'Tarragonian'. It was designed to be what I
        > feel is an elegant
        > romlang derived from Vulgar Latin. In contrast
        > to Þrjótrunn, there is
        > not one strict set of sound changes taken from
        > another existing
        > natlang, but a set compiled by my personal
        > preferences. (Are there
        > names to distinguish these two types of
        > conlangs?)

        I might suggest "Historical Conlang" (derived
        from "historical novel") because these particular
        languages are based on historical models and
        primary world phonologies.

        The others are just normal artlangs -- their
        basis is as much artistic in nature as realistic.

        > Some sound changes:
        >
        > - drop of initial unstressed i-: imperium
        > > mperi
        > - drop of final vowels: panem
        > > pan
        > - no palatalisation: caelum
        > > kel
        > - l > r shifts: blancum
        > > branke
        > - syncope: hominem
        > > ombre
        > - r..r dissimilation: regnum
        > > ringle
        > - epenthesis: insula
        > > istre

        Well, I can tell thee right away that I _love_
        the sound of this language! Though I wonder why
        sometimes the final -um drops off and sometimes
        it becomes -e? Will look more later!

        Padraic


        Camifi, Marusi, teterani, tester fuferios asteros; tamenio
        vem Persaecion empuriase ed ec pasem emduriase!
        --Pomperios Perfurios.

        --

        Ill Bethisad --
        <http://www.bethisad.com>


        Come visit The World! --
        <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>







        .
      • Henrik Theiling
        Hi! ... Yes, that sounds sensible. Could we name the difference by using historical romlang/artlang vs. diachronical romlang/artlang ? The former based on
        Message 3 of 8 , Mar 2, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi!

          Padraic Brown writes:
          > --- theiling@... wrote:
          >..
          > > I would like to announce my new romlang
          > > Terkunan [tErku'nan] or
          > > 'Tarragonian'. It was designed to be what I
          > > feel is an elegant
          > > romlang derived from Vulgar Latin. In contrast
          > > to Þrjótrunn, there is
          > > not one strict set of sound changes taken from
          > > another existing
          > > natlang, but a set compiled by my personal
          > > preferences. (Are there
          > > names to distinguish these two types of
          > > conlangs?)
          >
          > I might suggest "Historical Conlang" (derived
          > from "historical novel") because these particular
          > languages are based on historical models and
          > primary world phonologies.
          >
          > The others are just normal artlangs -- their
          > basis is as much artistic in nature as realistic.

          Yes, that sounds sensible. Could we name the difference by using
          'historical romlang/artlang' vs. 'diachronical romlang/artlang'? The
          former based on real history, the second, although also using a
          consistent conhistory, on a fictional set of rules?

          >...
          > Well, I can tell thee right away that I _love_
          > the sound of this language!

          Thanks, that is a nice achievement! :-)

          > Though I wonder why sometimes the final -um drops off and sometimes
          > it becomes -e? Will look more later!

          The -e is left if the final cluster is categorised unpronouncible in
          isolation. Phonology allows only single alveolars, and only sonorants
          or voicesless consonants. I.e. -n, -r, -l, -t, -s.

          There is currently a contradiction for the plural ending -s that
          produces more complex clusters like -ls or -ts. Either I will allow
          such clusters in the singular, too, or I define that a very recent
          shift has produced these clusters (e.g. by defining that the older
          plural ending was -es), after the -e in the stem had dropped/not
          dropped earlier.

          **Henrik
        • Padraic Brown
          ... I m sure such a distinction could be made, but I m not sure it would matter. The difference is still one of an historical model v. pure aesthetics, right?
          Message 4 of 8 , Mar 2, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            --- Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:

            > Hi!
            >
            > Padraic Brown writes:
            > > --- theiling@... wrote:
            > >..
            > > > I would like to announce my new romlang
            > > > Terkunan [tErku'nan] or
            > > > 'Tarragonian'. It was designed to be what
            > I
            > > > feel is an elegant
            > > > romlang derived from Vulgar Latin. In
            > contrast
            > > > to Þrjótrunn, there is
            > > > not one strict set of sound changes taken
            > from
            > > > another existing
            > > > natlang, but a set compiled by my personal
            > > > preferences. (Are there
            > > > names to distinguish these two types of
            > > > conlangs?)
            > >
            > > I might suggest "Historical Conlang" (derived
            > > from "historical novel") because these
            > particular
            > > languages are based on historical models and
            > > primary world phonologies.
            > >
            > > The others are just normal artlangs -- their
            > > basis is as much artistic in nature as
            > realistic.
            >
            > Yes, that sounds sensible. Could we name the
            > difference by using
            > 'historical romlang/artlang' vs. 'diachronical
            > romlang/artlang'? The
            > former based on real history, the second,
            > although also using a
            > consistent conhistory, on a fictional set of
            > rules?

            I'm sure such a distinction could be made, but
            I'm not sure it would matter. The difference is
            still one of an historical model v. pure
            aesthetics, right? Or did I miss something?

            > >...
            > > Well, I can tell thee right away that I
            > _love_
            > > the sound of this language!
            >
            > Thanks, that is a nice achievement! :-)
            >
            > > Though I wonder why sometimes the final -um
            > drops off and sometimes
            > > it becomes -e? Will look more later!
            >
            > The -e is left if the final cluster is
            > categorised unpronouncible in
            > isolation. Phonology allows only single
            > alveolars, and only sonorants
            > or voicesless consonants. I.e. -n, -r, -l, -t,
            > -s.

            Got it.

            > There is currently a contradiction for the
            > plural ending -s that
            > produces more complex clusters like -ls or -ts.
            > Either I will allow
            > such clusters in the singular, too, or I define
            > that a very recent
            > shift has produced these clusters (e.g. by
            > defining that the older
            > plural ending was -es), after the -e in the
            > stem had dropped/not
            > dropped earlier.

            Interesting stuff! It certainly adds depth to a
            conlang to consider details like this.

            Padraic

            >
            > **Henrik
            >
            >
            > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > --------------------~-->
            > Check out the new improvements in Yahoo! Groups
            > email.
            >
            http://us.click.yahoo.com/4It09A/fOaOAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
            >
            --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
            > romconlang-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            > (Yahoo! ID required)
            >
            > mailto:romconlang-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >


            Camifi, Marusi, teterani, tester fuferios asteros; tamenio
            vem Persaecion empuriase ed ec pasem emduriase!
            --Pomperios Perfurios.

            --

            Ill Bethisad --
            <http://www.bethisad.com>


            Come visit The World! --
            <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>







            .
          • Henrik Theiling
            Hi! ... Maybe we re talking about the same thing, I don t know. :-) I meant that both have a model, a conhistory, a grand master plan, but for one, it is based
            Message 5 of 8 , Mar 2, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi!

              Padraic Brown <elemtilas@...> writes:
              > --- Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:
              >...
              > > Yes, that sounds sensible. Could we name the
              > > difference by using
              > > 'historical romlang/artlang' vs. 'diachronical
              > > romlang/artlang'? The
              > > former based on real history, the second,
              > > although also using a
              > > consistent conhistory, on a fictional set of
              > > rules?
              >
              > I'm sure such a distinction could be made, but
              > I'm not sure it would matter. The difference is
              > still one of an historical model v. pure
              > aesthetics, right? Or did I miss something?

              Maybe we're talking about the same thing, I don't know. :-)

              I meant that both have a model, a conhistory, a grand master plan, but
              for one, it is based on an existing natlang, and for the other, it is
              pure aesthetics.

              Examples:

              'historical romlang': Brithenig, Wenedyk, Þrjótrunn, ...
              => grand master plan from other natlang

              'diacronical romlang': Jovian, Rhodese, Terkunan, ...
              => personal grand master plan

              'artistical romlang': Aingeljã, Regimonti, ...
              => purely artistical

              Forgive me for the great conlangs I did not mention above, this list
              is purely for the demonstration what categories I mean. And forgive
              me in case I got the categorisation wrong -- I'm doing this off my
              head.

              Of course there are mixed romlangs.

              >...
              > Interesting stuff! It certainly adds depth to a
              > conlang to consider details like this.

              Thanks! It's a lot of fun. Þrjótrunn showed me how much fun it
              really is. :-)

              **Henrik
            • Padraic Brown
              ... I see. Frankly, I would place the diachronical and the artistic together under artistic. Reason being, in my opinion, I don t see much of a difference
              Message 6 of 8 , Mar 2, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                --- Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:

                > Maybe we're talking about the same thing, I
                > don't know. :-)
                >
                > I meant that both have a model, a conhistory, a
                > grand master plan, but
                > for one, it is based on an existing natlang,
                > and for the other, it is
                > pure aesthetics.
                >
                > Examples:
                >
                > 'historical romlang': Brithenig, Wenedyk,
                > Þrjótrunn, ...
                > => grand master plan
                > from other natlang
                >
                > 'diacronical romlang': Jovian, Rhodese,
                > Terkunan, ...
                > => personal grand master
                > plan
                >
                > 'artistical romlang': Aingeljã, Regimonti, ...
                > => purely artistical

                I see. Frankly, I would place the diachronical
                and the artistic together under artistic. Reason
                being, in my opinion, I don't see much of a
                difference between "personal GMP" and "purely
                artistic".

                Padraic


                Camifi, Marusi, teterani, tester fuferios asteros; tamenio
                vem Persaecion empuriase ed ec pasem emduriase!
                --Pomperios Perfurios.

                --

                Ill Bethisad --
                <http://www.bethisad.com>


                Come visit The World! --
                <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>







                .
              • Henrik Theiling
                Hi! ... For my own conlangs, it is quite a difference (to me). Da Mätz se Basa has no formal GMP, but Terkunan does. It feels totally different when
                Message 7 of 8 , Mar 3, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi!

                  Padraic Brown writes:
                  > --- Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:
                  >...
                  > > 'historical romlang': Brithenig, Wenedyk, Þrjótrunn, ...
                  > > => grand master plan from other natlang
                  > >
                  > > 'diacronical romlang': Jovian, Rhodese, Terkunan, ...
                  > > => personal grand master plan
                  > >
                  > > 'artistical romlang': Aingeljã, Regimonti, ...
                  > > => purely artistical
                  >
                  > I see. Frankly, I would place the diachronical and the artistic
                  > together under artistic. Reason being, in my opinion, I don't see
                  > much of a difference between "personal GMP" and "purely artistic".

                  For my own conlangs, it is quite a difference (to me). Da Mätz se
                  Basa has no formal GMP, but Terkunan does. It feels totally different
                  when creating words since the decisions to be taken are different.

                  **Henrik
                • Jan van Steenbergen
                  ... I think the difference is quite important. As a matter of fact, I think category II comes much closer to category I than to category III. The only real
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jun 2 6:16 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- Padraic Brown skrzypszy:

                    > > Examples:
                    > >
                    > > 'historical romlang': Brithenig, Wenedyk, Þrjótrunn, ...
                    > > => grand master plan from other natlang
                    > >
                    > > 'diacronical romlang': Jovian, Rhodese, Terkunan, ...
                    > > => personal grand master plan
                    > >
                    > > 'artistical romlang': Aingeljã, Regimonti, ...
                    > > => purely artistical
                    >
                    > I see. Frankly, I would place the diachronical
                    > and the artistic together under artistic. Reason
                    > being, in my opinion, I don't see much of a
                    > difference between "personal GMP" and "purely
                    > artistic".

                    I think the difference is quite important. As a matter of fact, I
                    think category II comes much closer to category I than to category
                    III. The only real difference is that in I the entire GMP (or almost)
                    was borrowed from an existing, non-Romance natlang, which obviously
                    is not the case in II. From this point of view the name "historic"
                    vs. "diachronic" is somewhat confusing, because category II is no
                    less historic and category I is no less diachronic.

                    Of course I agree with the order: category I is definitely less
                    "artistic"; the rules for word creation are highly restrictive,
                    although I won't hide that Wenedyk is pretty full of exceptions on
                    the GMP, for the simple reason that I like the alternative outcome
                    better. Category II from this point of view leaves the creator with
                    more free manoevring space, for the simple reason that he can model
                    the GMP entirely after his own taste. Category III is quite different
                    (another notable example being Talossan, BTW). Here, the language is
                    Romance basically just because of its look-and-feel.

                    The difference is perhaps mostly visible in IB. Languages of category
                    I can be categorised internally as "Celto-Romance", "Slavo-Romance",
                    "Greco-Romance" etc., while languages of category II would rather
                    qualify as separate languages that do not belong to any sub-family at
                    all. Languages of category III would be extremely hard to quality as
                    real Romance languages at all, and if they are qualified anywhere,
                    it's just because of their look-and-feel.

                    Of course, a language would rather not exclusively belong to one
                    category only. Kerno, it seems, would primarily belong to category I,
                    but with a huge portion of III added to the mix. Correct me if I'm
                    wrong.

                    One major difference that involved languages of categories I and II
                    that is being disregarded here, is the question of the source
                    language. Is it Classical Latin (Jovian, Breathanach), Vulgar Latin
                    (Brithenig, Wenedyk), or perhaps some phase from the history of a
                    living romlang, let's see Old French, in which case the language
                    would rather be a con-dialect.

                    Categorising romlangs: yummy!

                    Jan

                    __________

                    "The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be
                    born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future
                    or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."
                    — G'Kar quoting G'Quon, Babylon 5

                    http://steen.free.fr/



                    _________________________________________________________
                    Alt i én. Få Yahoo! Mail med adressekartotek, kalender og
                    notisblokk. http://no.mail.yahoo.com
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.