Re: Scandinavian conlang

At 14:08 2.5.2003 -0600, Dirk Elzinga wrote:

>It sounds Scandinavian to me, though the preaspirated geminates remind
>me of Icelandic (where they're not geminate after being preaspirated).
>Get to work on the orthography! I'm interested in pseudo-Scandinavian
>orthographies for my nascent Ustekkli project. It wants to have a more
>or less Germanic phonological cast (Norwegian and Frisian with some
>Middle English thrown in) with a Southern Uto-Aztecan morpho-syntax.
It may interest you that as a part of my Vínlandic ramblings in Lucus
have toyed with an Icelandic-based orthography for Iroquoian (essentially
Mohawk).  Also the demotic language of Vínland is an Iroquoian-creolized
Old Norse (Basilectal Vínlenzka).  Some of the sound-laws of Vinlandic
-- even the acrolectal variety is phonetically quite different from
New Icelandic and in some respects, like retention of the old system of
quantity, is closer to Old Norse -- make for quainter spellings in
this orthography than a knowledge of Icelandic might lead you to expect.
Notably all varieties of Vinlandic have gone through a /T/ > /h/ change,
so that Thorn comes to be used for /?/ in the Skraeling languages.



/ B.Philip Jonsson B^)
--
mailto:melrochX@melroch.net (delete X!)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
No man forgets his original trade: the rights of
nations and of kings sink into questions of grammar,
if grammarians discuss them.
-Dr. Samuel Johnson (1707 - 1784)