by Max Barry

Latest Forum Topics

Advertisement

Council of Constructed Languages Board

Search

Search

[+] Advanced...

Author:

Region:

Sort:

«12. . .166167168169170171172. . .188189»

Manarsch

Kowani wrote:t'eres vivo?
you're alive?

Oñis :)
Yes :)

Manarsch wrote:Oñis :)
Yes :)

q'bom
marvelous

Upper Alterac and Manarsch

Post self-deleted by Eastern Tatarstan.

Auruna wrote:

Agglutinative - Words can be modified with different morphemes to determine their meaning but the morphemes, usually affixes, remain even if you put more and more morphemes on each other.
Examples:
Tagalog - Kain (eat) → Kumain (to eat / ate) / Kumakain (eating) / Nakain (has been eaten) / Nakakain (has eaten)
Finnish - Huone (room) → Huoneet (rooms) / Huoneita (some rooms) / Huoneissa (in rooms)
Japanese - (from Wikipedia)
taberu ("(subject) will eat (it)")
tabetai ("(subject) wants to eat (it)")
tabetakunai ("(subject) doesn't want to eat (it)")
tabetakunakatta ("(subject) didn't want to eat (it)")

*Estonian SSR anthem instrumental intensifies*

Тамьк - food
Тамькак - to eat
Мьнтамькак - I eat (imperfect)
Мьнтамькакьз - I eat (perfect)
Мьнтамькаккьн - I eat (habitative)
Мьнтамькакжар - eat (imperative; in this case the speaker is ordering him/herself to eat)
Мьнтамькактьль - I want to eat
Мьнтамькакьмьштьль - I don't want to eat
Мьнтамькакьмьштьльга - I didn't want to eat

Basically all inflection used with verbs can be used with modal suffixes as well:
Мьнактьгактьлькьнта олау vs Мьнактьгаккьнтьльга олау
Both sentences could be loosely translated as "I wanted to do it" but in the first one, the habitative suffix used with modal suffix "want" but not with the werb "to do" means that at multiple distinct points in the past I wanted to do it - "I had the habit of wanting to do something", however in the second one, the suffix was moved to the verb and the meaning switched and it became "I wanted to have the habit of doing something".

And for the Finnish bit (I don't have a word for romm yet so I'll use "house"):

Үі - house
Үітар - houses
Ашүітар - some houses
Ашүітарда - in some houses (general location)
Ашүітаржьль - inside of some houses (precise location)
Үітармьнтарньнаіналашагьм - towards the surroundings of our houses

Auruna wrote:I can try to help, although I'm more knowledgeable in agglutinative languages and a lot of these are broad terms.

Agglutinative - Words can be modified with different morphemes to determine their meaning but the morphemes, usually affixes, remain even if you put more and more morphemes on each other.
Examples:
Tagalog - Kain (eat) → Kumain (to eat / ate) / Kumakain (eating) / Nakain (has been eaten) / Nakakain (has eaten)
....

Kuerhyét verbal morphology is both affixing and isolating.

Suinä - to eat, eating
Suinänu - I eat, I’m eating
Suinädie - thou’re eating
Suinta - (s)he/it’s eating

Suinänäm - the two of us but not you are eating
Suinämem - thou and me are eating
Suinädim - the two of you’re eating
Suinteam - the two of them are eating

Suinä - we but not you are eating
Suinäme - we’re eating
Suinädi - you’re eating
Suintea - they’re are eating

Suinäso - someone is/are eating
There’s a spescial form for mentioning who is eating:
Suinin Marya - Marya is eating

Here, suinä is used as an intransitive verb, IE one without an object. In transitive sentences, the personal marking on the verb is reserved for the object, and the subject is either free-standing or marked on a preverb:
Enu suinin ohu - I’m eating an apple
Adie/edie/idie* suinin ohu - thou’re eating an apple
Ata suinin ohu - (s)he/it’s eating an apple
Dual and plural can be inferred from the above list.
*Intimate/general/polite form

Tense and aspect marking is isolating, and done with a preverb:
Suinänu - I’m eating
Hau suinänu - I am eating (with marked progressive aspect, I am in the process of eating)
Hua suinänu - I ate, I have been eating
Huä suinänu - I have (just) finished eating
Het suinänu - I finised eating (some time in the past)
Eyer suinänu - I (just now) started eating
Ayet suinänu - I started eating (some time in the past)
Tuo suinänu - I’m going to eat
Tuet suinänu - I was going to eat
Na suinänu - I use to eat
Nena suinänu - I used to eat
(This list is not exhaustive, and I’ve probably not even worked out all forms yet..)

Adding an object, thus turning suinä into a transitive verb will mean the subject (or more correctly, agent) is marked on the preverb. It’s never wrong to mark every subject on the preverb, but 1p.sg (I) can be omitted on certain preverbs, and 3p.sg can be omitted on others.. (I might edit in a list and a bit more explanations later, but I’m kindof running out of time rn..):

Hua suinta / huanu suinta - I ate it.
Nenayin Mihala suinin buiju - Mihal used to eat snot
There is also negator yu, yes/no-question verbal suffix -cyi and question particle ci:
Yudie nenacyi suinin buiju ci? - You didn't use to eat snot, did you?

Well then, my turn with Aurun. Verbs had a lot of work done to them and I'm not yet finished.

Esta - Eat
Esta(n)a - To eat / Eating
Estanen - Eating (3rd person)
Estani - Ate
Estaje - It eats / It is eating - referring to non-living things
Estaake - Finished eating
Estaaketa - Just ate
Estanesa - Will eat
Estanite - Can eat
Estaneli - Would eat
Estaakela - Has eaten
Estaakele - Have eaten
Estaakelata - Has been eaten
Estaakeleta - Have been eaten
Estame - Going to eat / About to eat

En esta keikani - He eats cake
En esta keikaa - He eats some of the cake
En estanen keikani - He is eating cake
En estanen keikaa - He is eating some of the cake
En estani keikani - He ate cake
En estani keikaa - He ate some of the cake
Keikani estaakelata - The cake has been eaten
Keikaa estaakelata - Some of the cake has been eaten
Keikanit estaakeleta - The cakes have been eaten
Keikaanet estaakeleta - Some of the cakes have been eaten

Keikanet estani ena - The cakes ate him
Keikanet estaje ena - The cakes are eating him

Okay I need to stop for now.
Headaches, headaches.

Auruna wrote:

Keikanet estaje ena - The cakes are eating him

I hate it when that happens.

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:I hate it when that happens.

Inverse diabetes

Kowani wrote:Inverse diabetes

Diabetes type x^(-1), the most deadly kind. XD

Manarsch

Kowani wrote:q'bom
marvelous

Giélyn!
Thank you!

Haku unnə əkater δi, palla unnə oku makə.. Aterə irə əkInna.
I'm making a new language, I don't know why.. It's name is Inna.

XO

I neeed to stop procrastinating.

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:Haku unnə əkater δi, palla unnə oku makə.. Aterə irə əkInna.
I'm making a new language, I don't know why.. It's name is Inna.

For some reason I feel Cyrillic would suit this lang..
Хаку уннь ькатер ҙи, палла уннь оку макь.. Атерь ирь ькИнна.
What do you think, Latin or Cyrillic?

-Never mind.-

Inna nominal morphosyntax.
Inna has three nominal numbers: singular, paucal (two, three or four) and plural. Sg is unmarked, while pc and pl are marked by articles that might either precede or follow their head noun; im for pc and i for pl.
Definiteness is not a mandatory category, but may be shown by the article a for singular, and either by the article a in front of and the pc/pl article following the head noun, or by the number article both in front and following:
- (a/the) woman, a tə - the woman, im tə / tə im - (the) few (two, three or four) women, a tə im / im tə im - the few women, i tə / tə i - (the) women (five or more) , a tə i / i tə i - the women (five or more)

There are three basic pronouns, which can be distinguished numerically by the same numeral articles im and i.
Unnə - 1p. - I, im unnə / unnə im - we (two, three or four), i unnə / unnə i - we (five or more)
Dinə - 2p. - you sg, im dinə / dinə im - you pc, i dinə / dinə i - you pl
Atta - 3p. human - (s)he, im atta / atta im - they pc, i atta / atta i - they pl
Irə - 3p. non-human - it, im irə / irə im - they (n-h) pc, i irə / irə i - they (n-h) pl

The 3p pronouns double as demonstrative articles (this, that) when directly following a noun. The this/that distinction can be clarified by a locational modifier (o - next to me, ete - next to you, ide - over there, uδδe - unseen) :
era - (a/the) head, era irə - this head, era irə o - this head here, era irə ete - that head next to you, im era irə ide - those (pc) heads over there, i era irə uδδe - those (pl) heads which we can't see.

There are two classes of noun cases: core cases and locational cases. The core cases are prefixed (apart from absolutive which is unmarked), while the locational cases are suffixed. A noun can only have one core case at a time, while the locational cases can stack.
Absolutive: Ø-
Eregative: kə-
Genitive-secundative: δə-
Inessive: -tən
Ablative: -δər
Illative: -tannu
Allative: -tinne
Comitative: -mun

Imagine English but like Simplified Chinese

What would be the changes, aside from eliminating synonyms?

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:For some reason I feel Cyrillic would suit this lang..
Хаку уннь ькатер ҙи, палла уннь оку макь.. Атерь ирь ькИнна.
What do you think, Latin or Cyrillic?

What does capital I mean? If it were Cyrillic, you could prolly replace it with another character.

Old Zealand Founder wrote:What does capital I mean? If it were Cyrillic, you could prolly replace it with another character.

The capital И is a capital И, as it is the first letter of the name of the language, Инна. Prefixed ьк- is not capitalised.

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:The capital И is a capital И, as it is the first letter of the name of the language, Инна. Prefixed ьк- is not capitalised.

Ah, I see. I thought there was some kind of Klingon capitalization whatever going on here.

By the way: do you think that it is possible for normal L and dark L (in my conlang) to be distinguished? Or would they inevitably become allophones?

Old Zealand Founder wrote:Imagine English but like Simplified Chinese

What would be the changes, aside from eliminating synonyms?

No more umlaut maybe, so only -s for pluralisation? One foot - two foots. XD

Old Zealand Founder wrote:Ah, I see. I thought there was some kind of Klingon capitalization whatever going on here.

By the way: do you think that it is possible for normal L and dark L (in my conlang) to be distinguished? Or would they inevitably become allophones?

Hm. There are some languages that distinguish several lateral sounds as separate phonemes, so it's definitely possible. Don't know about the statistical stability of such a system, but these things tend to be really language specific so I wouldn't worry about that. :)

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:No more umlaut maybe, so only -s for pluralisation? One foot - two foots. XD

Hm. There are some languages that distinguish several lateral sounds as separate phonemes, so it's definitely possible. Don't know about the statistical stability of such a system, but these things tend to be really language specific so I wouldn't worry about that. :)

1. For one second I thought you were talking about poetry, and I freaked out because I forgot everything about poetry and foots and meter.
2. I might represent it with Ł / ł. Sorry Poles, I still have no idea how that represents /w/.

Old Zealand Founder wrote:1. For one second I thought you were talking about poetry, and I freaked out because I forgot everything about poetry and foots and meter.
2. I might represent it with Ł / ł. Sorry Poles, I still have no idea how that represents /w/.

1. XD
2. Just goes to show that the original Polish system with both /l/ and /lˠ/ were not that stable in the end. Learn from Polish's mistakes. XD

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:1. XD
2. Just goes to show that the original Polish system with both /l/ and /lˠ/ were not that stable in the end. Learn from Polish's mistakes. XD

Good morning!

Last thing I watched yesterday was Biblaridion, now my conlang feels stupid. But it's personal and not naturalistic so who cares really; as long as it's not Thandian I'm good

Old Zealand Founder wrote:Good morning!

Last thing I watched yesterday was Biblaridion, now my conlang feels stupid. But it's personal and not naturalistic so who cares really; as long as it's not Thandian I'm good

God morning!
Hadn't heard about Biblaridion before, I'll check it out.

The way I see it, conlanging is an iterative exercise. You're supposed to make stuff you're not satisfied with and start over.. That's how you learn. :)

Kuerhyedeenistan wrote:God morning!
Hadn't heard about Biblaridion before, I'll check it out.

The way I see it, conlanging is an iterative exercise. You're supposed to make stuff you're not satisfied with and start over.. That's how you learn. :)

s'o'foi ḿetodo, bomsur
yes, that was definitely my method

Word of the day: brachwair
sibling (lit. brother-sister)

«12. . .166167168169170171172. . .188189»

Advertisement