Sending a Message

September 3rd, 2021

I have an ever-growing backlog of concepts for which I want to create new Kílta words. It gives me all the stress you expect from a todo list. One benefit of the delay, however, is that I regularly think up better derivations, or better nuance, if I have time to let a concept percolate a while before I commit to it.

One concept I've been thinking about is a way to indicate if a state of affairs communicates some other message. For example, if someone stops answering your phone calls, that says something. Often we can rely on Grice and experience to help us figure out when other messages are being communicated by someone's actions, but I wanted a way to be a bit more explicit about it. This sat on my todo list quite a while, and then just yesterday a good way to handle this presented itself: an auxiliary with a converb.

The verb ráno means signal, make a sign, as well as point out.

Eman në tátiën mai ráno.
child TOP dog LAT point-out.PFV
The child pointed at the dog

But yesterday it occurred to me that my send a message sense matches with this nicely. Now, a general converb followed by ráno marks that the state of affairs also communicates some other message.

Ha kë mës mítët ráno.
1SG DAT NEG speak.CVB.PFV signal.PFV
She didn't talk to me (which makes some other point, too)

Often an overt translation of this into English is going to be a bit clunky, but I've got growing pile of those in Kílta, too.

In any case, rather than creating a new clause-final particle or entirely new lexeme, I've just added to Kílta's substantial battery of auxiliary verbs.

Complete Grammar of the Yajéé Language

September 1st, 2021

P. A. Lewis is a professional classical oboist and produces conlangs as a hobby. He has been interested in conlanging since 2018, and has been a member of the conlang community since 2020. His primary interest in language is in historical linguistics, and thus his conlangs are all spoken in a single conworld, Omnia (website coming soon). Some conlangs he has created include (in order of how proud he is of them): Yajéé, Andva, Radoza, and Chiset.

Abstract

This is a complete grammar of the Yajéé language, featuring an extensive overview of its phonology and morphosyntax in its current state. The grammar includes a robust discussion of the pitch accent system employed by the language. Other notable features include: a telicity-based derivational system which impacts the semantics of the aspect under suffixes, umlaut and other phonological changes which result in multiple stems for nearly every noun and verb, and rampant pronoun dropping despite having no verb agreement.

Version History


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Unknown Riches

August 28th, 2021

A few weeks ago I was chatting with some conlangers, and we were talking a bit about some deeper issues in conlanging, especially around personal conlangs. I was extolling the virtues—not entirely coherently— of keeping a diary in your conlang. I said that you don't always know what resources you already have available when you want to create something new, but that inhabiting the language even a little, such as in a diary, will open up possibilities that might not otherwise occur to you.

One of Kílta's riches that occurred to me very recently, based on only a few uses of the diminutive, was that I could use to mark what is effectively first person possession when referring to direct line family relationships (grandparent, parent, sibling, child, grandchild):

Ommira në erniënto.
omm-ira në er-niënt-o
mother-DIM TOP TRANS-leave-PFV
My/our mother left.

With a little more thought I decided this could extend out to non-direct relations (cousins, nieces, etc.), if you grew up seeing them nearly every day.

Finally, I decided that with possession, you could use the diminutive to refer to family members very close friends you spent a lot of time with, especially while growing up.:

Ton vë ommira në erniënto.
2SG ATTR omm-ira në er-niënt-o
mother-DIM TOP TRANS-leave-PFV
Your mother left.

Since Kílta is a personal language, there aren't many opportunities for me to make use of the construction in this second example, because none of my childhood friends are ever going to learn the language. Nonetheless, I sometimes create things for Kílta to establish a general ambience, to suggest the full meaning of a construction, even if marginal functions of a construction aren't going to get much use.

When a conlang needs something new, it's easy to just create something entirely new, and often enough that's necessary. But I always enjoy finding preexisting material ready to be used to create some new construction or nuance.

A Bryatesle Mystical Practice

August 21st, 2021

In the Bryatesle-Dairwueh religious landscape, there is a variety of mystical practices in the religious communities. Some schools of mysticism overlap many of the faiths, some schools of mysticism are closely aligned with some particular faith, and some schools of mysticism are more or less synonymous with a faith.

Within the stedbaprian faith, a widely held idea is that humans live their lives in a state comparable to inebriation. We do not realize the true state of affairs, because this pseudo-inebriety prevents us from seeing clearly it.

There are several ways of dealing with this. Note, however, that the state is not the same as inebriation. From this emerges a notion: if a person can, during inebriation, practice his ability to think clearly, this will help him see clearly when sober.

Thus, the stedbaprian mystics will consume alcohol and various psychoactive herbs at certain times, and then practice a variety of cognitively demanding tasks. This tends to be done in groups of at least three.

A person who is very proficient at these tests when intoxicated will be considered more likely to be able to see the world as it is, and hence will be more trustworthy and proficient in thought, perception, behavior and skills.

Feasibility, Conlangs and a Challenge

August 9th, 2021

Through the years, I have suggested some typologically unlikely, and maybe even some typologically impossible ideas in this blog. I find typologically unlikely - and even antiuniversal - systems somewhat interesting. However, I do believe there are some types of systems that we even find in some conlangs, which violate a type of constraint that I believe is a solid wall of impossibility.

In my own thoughts on this topic, I basically think of them just by the term "genuinely impossible systems". However, an issue with them is that their surface realization is possible - and there's probably multiple genuinely impossible systems corresponding to every possible surface realization.

Here's a phonological example. In antirealistic, there are two phonemes /b/ and /p/. These have the following realizations. NB: the phones themselves aren't really the interesting thing here, their relative realizations are:

initial: /b/ : [b], /p/ : [p]
medial: /b/ : [p], /p/: [b]

Why do I hold this to be unrealistic? Unless there's super-strong morphophonemic reasons to identify the [b] inside a word with /p/, and the [b] in the onset with /b/, I am very certain that any child or foreigner learning this language will identify the [b]-sounds as /b/, and the [p]-sounds as /p/. In lieu of a very strong morphophonemic relation here, there's no way a learner would identify them like that - even if the writing system maintained the identity.

A morphological example, then - and I don't think we find much of these in conlangs (unlike the phonological example seen above). In unrealistic, there are special verb forms corresponding to English -ing, and in unrealistic it's -int. However, for intransitive verbs, this consists of -i- (intransitive) and -nt (intransitive active participle), whereas for transitive verbs it consits of -in- (transitive) and -t (transitive active participle). Unless -in-, -i-, -n-, -t and -nt exist as independent morphemes but only ever occur in this context, there's no reason a learner would identify this as a complex suffix.

Syntax, then. Can anyone come up with a good syntactical example of a similar infeasible structure?



Detail #414: Passives and Reflexives

August 3rd, 2021

Passives and reflexives sometimes are fairly similar (and in some languages even indistinguishable). One of the Russian passive constructions is the reflexive construction, and the Swedish synthetic passive originates in a perfectly analogous construction - a reduced reflexive pronoun becoming a verb morpheme.

In some languages, the "passive" does not promote the object to subject position. This, for instance, is the case in modern Finnish (but earlier, it does seem it might have been the case). However, since the passive fulfills many of the roles the passive fulfills in other languages - emphasizing the object as the "central" participant, omitting the subject, etc - it gets to be called a passive.

This leaves open a simple way of keeping the reflexive and passive distinct, yet reuse the morphology:

noun.nom verb.refl = reflexive
noun.obj verb.refl = passive

However, there are of course reflexive constructions (and passive ones!) that do not directly pertain to the direct object - "I gave myself a surprise", "I looked at my toe", "I did it for myself". In such circumstances, I like the idea of letting a language conflate the two, or possible allow for disambiguating the reflexive by inserting a pronoun.

Further, third person pronouns could possibly have an anti-reflexive morpheme available for such constructions:

he saw.refl him.nonrefl in front of him

he1 saw him2 in front of himself1

I am pretty sure the idea of a nonreflexive pronoun has occurred previously in this blog, but I am pretty sure the general idea here is new. I am considering including it in Bryatesle, since its reflexive and passive system is still underdeveloped. However, it feels like integrating this with the Bryatesle case system would be a nightmare.

Alas, Ćwarmin, Sargaĺk and Bryatesle all have sufficient passive/reflexive systems fleshed out, Ŋžädär isn't really suitable for this, and Tatediem is off the table, for now at least. Maybe I should revive it.

Real Language Details: Word Order operations in Swedish

August 1st, 2021

As usual, my real life language example will come from Swedish (a habit I really need to break). This time, we're looking at word order in main clauses. First, Swedish is in many ways similar to English, but differs on a few important points:

  • thou/you-distinction, and case distinction on both. I will use thou/thee and you/ye for nom/acc in my English examples.
  • In spoken Swedish, 'de' (they) and 'dem' (them) have - in most regiolects - been conflated to 'dom', which I will write 'thom'.

Swedish is V2, unlike English, which means that almost always, there'll be one constituent left of the finite verb, and the rest will go to the right. Exceptions include a handful of adverbs that can go between the subject and the verb, and questions, which have a fairly strict VSO order.

Basically, some linguists describe the Swedish word order in main clauses as follows:

[fundament] V S * iO * dO *

The asterisks represent adverbs, whose rules are not all that interesting with regards to this point (but may be dealt with later). If the fundament remains empty, it is a question, but if any thing from the right of the verb is moved to the fundament, you get a statement. Adverbs can be moved, subjects, objects, indirect objects, etc. If it's a prepositional phrase that is moved, the preposition can be stranded at the end of the clause.

Now to some exceptions. For conservative speakers, objects that are personal pronouns can further be shifted leftwards to the slot directly right of the verb, displacing the subject:

then saw thee a friend

It seems there are some restrictions:

  • a heavy subject is more likely to move right, or a subject that has some "association" rightwards - i.e. coordination with something in the next clause
  • a pronominal subject cannot be displaced
  • a definite, non-heavy subject  seems unwilling to be displaced

Now we're getting to an interesting bit, were there's two groups of conservative speakers, and the less conservative group is shitting on the more conservative group for being sloppy.

The they-them distinction, as mention, is weakened in the spoken language, such that 'thom' has replaced both. Thus, 

thom see me
I see thom

are both permissible in most speakers' eyes and ears. This causes a complication where speakers who are unsure of the written form tend to err on the side of using 'them', giving results such as

them see me
I see them

This annoys a fairly large contingent of conservative speakers - even those conservative speakers who themselves have 'thom' in the spoken form but who have good intuitions for when which form is used.

Some conservative speakers seem to instinctively correct every 'them' that is in even a slightly unusual position to 'they'. Thus,

then answered them a voice over the speaker

will be hypercorrected by them to

then answered they a voice over the speaker

even in contexts where this makes no sense. There seems to be four kinds of readers with regards to this:

  1. Some readers do not react at all that anything is wrong, and will read 'them' as the subject.
  2. Some readers react that something is wrong, and will read 'them' as the subject, and would correct it to 'they'. These will consider the sentence sloppily written and a sign of the modern degradation of the language.
  3. Some readers react that the word order is wrong, but read 'them' as the object. These will consider the sentence sloppily written and a sign of the modern degradation of the language.
  4. Some readers do not react at all that anything is wrong, and will read 'them' as the object. If they are keenly aware of Swedish linguistic developments over the last 100 years or so, they will see this as somewhat conservative.

Of course, group #4 and #3 will be aware that some writers do not distinguish they/them, and if the context has several they/them-errors, they will join #2 temporarily.

Esis Vinter

August 1st, 2021

Francisco ACP Andrade is a Professor of Law at Universidade do Minho Law School. Having Portuguese as his native language, he is quite fluent in French, Spanish, and English. He studied in France (Poitiers), England (Sheffield), and in the US (Seattle). He has also studied some Italian, German, and Russian. Being very interested in European languages, he started, as a hobby, to create an auxiliary language that could be understood as really European. That was the beginning of the project of the language Europeze, an auxiliary language derived from the main European languages, based mainly in Romance and Germanic languages, but with some elements of other European languages (mostly, but not only, Slavic languages and Greek).

Abstract

“Esis Vinter” is a story based on the life of a foreign student in Sheffield (England) in 1994-1995. It is told as a surrealistic tale, and it shows the difficulties arising from cultural differences and the friendship established with some of the international students. The story is mainly developed around the friendship of the narrator and a French girl. Cultural references to differences and similarities between Portugal and France in contrast to the English way of life are a constant of the tale. The story is presented in Europeze, French, and English.

Version History


This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

Detail #413: Object Prepositions encoding a bunch of stuff

July 31st, 2021

This system might be incorporated into a conlang of mine in the future. Consider a system where direct objects often take a sort of accusative preposition, but this preposition also is inflected with information about the object and the verb.

To some extent, the inflections can be combined - but not indiscriminately so.

The basic preposition could be a syllable, say ir. Maybe we have some congruence thing going on, so it might be ar for plurals or something like that. It also is not used with pronouns - and not only not with personal pronouns, but not with pronouns in general. (Possibly with the caveat that indefinites and some quantifying pronouns may permit taking them.)

Restrictions on use

All individuated objects that are not pronouns or proper nouns require an object preposition. For perfective verbs, non-individuated objects may also take the preposition.

In subclauses, the object preposition may act as a head of a verb phrase without any actual verb involved.

Prefixes 

s- : bring into existence
w- : change the nature of something gradually
p- : change the nature of something in a way that breaks categorization
n- : destroy


sw- and sn- seem to be used by some speakers for a slow, gradual process of creation or destruction, but is far from accepted by all.

Postfixes

-k : the object in half
-kek :the object into multiple parts
-ta : the object is intrinsic, habitually recurring; the verb could be considered gnomic.
-ba : the object is temporary, accidental, occasional or incidental.

Circumfixes
Circumfixes cannot co-occur with pre- or postfixes.

k- ... -di : an object of strong desire
f- ... -ap : an object of strong hate
kus- ... -a : an action that merges objects or brings them together locally


Constructed Languages 2021-07-24 23:58:02

July 24th, 2021

Hello,
My name is Johnathan Palmer and I used to be a little involved on this journal years back. I have since finished my B.A. degree in Applied Linguistics with a minor in Psychology. I graduated from Ashford University which is now the University of Arizona global campus. I just filled out the form to become a member of the LCS and will be sending in my payment at the beginning of next month. I don't know if anyone remembers me but that's okay. I have been working on a couple of conlangs for about five years now. I have finished one and would like to explain it from a linguistic point of view. It is a poly-synthetic language that I have named Taljruk with an accent on the a. If anyone is interested let me know and Ill share how it works. 

Example: King = Afer (a as in after, and er as in the er in after) - Noun
              Wiley = Kiznihk (Wiley, first i sounds like y in symbol and second i sound as in nick) - adj
 

               The Wiley king = Kizafernihk
        Do you see what I did there? I inserted the noun afer in the middle of the adj kiznihk.