Re: "frankenlang"

Hi!

Danny Wier <dawiertx@...> writes:
> From: "Henrik Theiling" <theiling@...>
> I think there's a form of Mandarin (not another Chinese language, Mandarin
> itself) that has an extra class of sibilant: for "s/sh" type sounds, an /S/
> in addition to /s/, /s`/ and /s\/.
Haha, really!?  I only know that many Chinese people *drop* one
distinction: sh/ch/zh = s/c/z.

> How DO you get 800 consonants into an inventory?
Well, by multiplication: I used all the positions and all the
modifications I though I could pronounce (with some effort and
concentration, of cause).

> I tried for a thousand or something, then gave up for the sake of
> realism ...
Ok, realism was not the goal...  But I think all consonants could be
distinguished, though.  But realistic -- no...

> (okay, Tech will have up to a measly 216 consonants and at least six
> vowels, but I'm really trying to have an equally complex grammar and
> vocabulary!)
:-) A frankenlang in all aspects, then.  I also once tried to get a
complex grammar, but invention was so exhausting!

> Degradation instead of gradation... I like that.
It has both directions, actually: it uses a root from a limited set of
consonants and (instead of inserting vowels as in semitic), the
consonants are modified to make a stem.  The degrees are numbered -2
.. +3, I think.

> > sequences of letters...  E.g. the dative ending is
> >
> >    -gnctlku
>
> How do you pronounce THAT!? [nd`_<_e_w:] or something? ;)
No, it's a click.  I'm not really sure about X-Sampa for clicks with
secondary articulation, but it is something like:

   [N|\|\gu_T]

> My discovery in adulthood of languages like Tashelhit and Georgian made me
> realize I was a lightweight then it came to unpronounceability.
Yes, same here.  I was very surprised what people can regularly
pronounce in natlangs.  And also, what they are able to do wrt.
morphology and syntax during speaking.

**Henrik