Re: Difficult language ideas

Hi, Leigh.

I speak a little Quechua, and the most difficult syntactic thing for
me is probably placement of the evidential clitics -- the "migratory
suffixes" that indicate whether you know the information by witness,
hearsay, or conjecture.  I know the basic rule, but there are
apparently complications when the topic marker -qa is introduced.

For a learner more advanced than I, I've gathered that a more
difficult problem is that certain suffix combinations have
idiosyncratic meanings that wouldn't be deduced from their parts.
(I've found the morphology to be pretty regular, but I'm a beginner
and won't have come in contact with the more advanced stuff.)  This
goes along with your goal "that guessing something new from what you
already know will rarely work."

----------

Other difficult stuff: Search the archives for Suffixaufnahme and
Suffixhäufung, both of which could add significant complication to a
very suffixing language of the Andean sort.

I'm putting together a presentation in which one of the examples is
Sumerian, so I can give an example of Suffixhäufung off the top of my
head:

é         shesh lugal-ak-ak-a
house brother king-of-of-in
"In the house of the brother of the king."

The genitive suffix -ak (really a clitic, in my analysis) is
"postponed" until the final word of the phrase... and when you have
nested genitives they will all "stack up" on the end.

Also, Eldin and I, and some others, had a discussion awhile back about
the Kwak'wala (Kwakiutl) and Heiltsuk, both Northern Wakashan
languages, in which case and possession aren't marked on the word they
modify, but on the *previous* word of the sentence, due again to
clitic phenomena.

While we're at it, you could put in some lexical suffixes from
Wakashan, too.  They're suffixes that add meanings that in other
languages would be the domain of roots.  So, in Nuuchahnulth (Nootka):

hiy'aktliqs?i
hilh       -'aktli                  -aqs                  -?i
be.there-being.at.the.rear-being.in.a.canoe-DEF
"the stern"

tl'utl'uqyimlh
tl'uq -yimlh
wide-being.at.the.shoulder
"wide shoulder"

These, incidentally, also show migratory behavior, showing up
elsewhere than where you might expect them:

?iiw'aap?ish yacyut shuuwis
?iihw -'aap     -?is    yacyut shuuwis
large -buying -IND.3 worn    shoes
"He bought big used shoes."

Anyway, any combination of these phenomena would lead to some
fantastically complicated grammar.  You could also search here for
noun incorporation, which we discuss fairly frequently; it's not
characteristic of Andean languages but appears in many neighboring
regions.

Have fun,

Pat

On 9/19/06, Leigh Richards <palomaverde@...> wrote:
> Hi all, I'm Leigh. I've lurked for a while, but I haven't posted before.
> I've toyed with a few conlangs over the years, and now I'm brainstorming on
> a language for a conworld of mine.
>
> Design goals:
> 1. As unambiguous as possible, especially in full sentences; it's easy to
> clarify any ambiguities.
> 2. Hard to learn, and easy to say the wrong thing. Small and subtle changes
> have a large impact on the meaning, and it's unpredictable in that guessing
> something new from what you already know will rarely work.
>
>  It is a status language of sorts and effectively a conlang itself, so it
> isn't meant to be simple or naturalistic. It can change, but it takes a
> concerted effort by the speakers because outside forces keep it from
> changing otherwise.
>
> I don't know a lot about the normal languages of the area, but I think
> they'll be similar to the Andean languages.
>
> I have a few ideas, but my knowledge of linguistics is fairly limited. So
> I'd like your input.
>
> Suggestions? Things to include? Things to avoid?
>
> Thanks,
> Leigh
>
>

Replies