----------
> Van: Paul Bennett <Paul.Bennett@...>
> Aan: Multiple recipients of list CONLANG <CONLANG@...>
> Onderwerp: New H/G lang?
> Datum: maandag 11 oktober 1999 12:16
>=20
> I don't have my notes with me, as I wasn't going to ask at this stage i=
n
the
> lang, but I've begun thinking about a new conlang over the weekend.
>=20
> Here's a very brief description, and a few questions, please answer
frankly and
> candidly:
>=20
> The lang has an enormous consonantal phono, I make it 288 consonants (3
series
> (regular, labialised & palatalised) of an 8 POA x 12 MOA consonant grid=
).
Could
> the human brain actually handle this differentiation in "real life"?
I don't know, I don't think so, otherwise there would have been a natlang
having so many cons. On the other hand, it is very regular and both !Xu~
and Ubykh (have been mentioned earlier) have such a large inventory due t=
o
that kind of regularity.
> Also,
> there's only two vowels, would i-bar and lowered-schwa be "realistic"
vowels?.
Very realistic. You don't need many vowels when you have a lot of
consonants. There is a (Caucasian) natlang with only two vowels, being
different only in high vs. low (@ vs a).
> All this sounds VERY suspiciously like a lot of stuff that has been
discussed on
> the list recently, but I swear it's (mainly) subconcious borrowing, the
idea has
> been on my mind for some time..
>=20
> All roots are CVCVCV, and are defined using the "voiceless stop" row of
the
> consonant table (ie {pitaca}, {xat[ika}) Each of the three syllables
"moves" to
> a different row on the consonant table (ie to Voiced Affricate or
Prenasalised
> Voiced Stop) to show a different grammatical function. For example: PO=
S,
> Person, Tense, Degree, Reflexivity, Number etc. Is this like any other
> (con|nat)lang? It seems to me like a kind of "inverse arabic" <G>, but
that's
> probably not a very good term.
I have that in Gbw=EC=E0 too, and I like it a lot, It works very well. Er=
gative
is prenasalised (m-) on nouns,=20
Tone has a place in grammar too, but you don't have tone. Oblique cases g=
et
implosive/ejective (depending on voiceless/voiced). Ejectivity on verbs
mark non-control and I have aspiration left over for some other features
(aspect and anti-passive, but I must read more on antipassive in order to
be sure).
I like phonologies very much, so please send it to the list (or to my
private mail if you don't want to put it on the list).
> I make that 36^3 possible shades of meaning for
> each of (8^3)x(2^3) roots?
>=20
> How reasonable would it be to postulate this as a late-neolithic/early
> bronze-age hunter/gatherer lang?
Why not? I once made a language for Neanderhalers and it was very funny
with *all* kinds of states of the glottis (breathy, ejective etc.). the
pejorative was the linguolabial trill mentioned in another thread.
Boudewijn didn't approve on this, he thought Neanderthalers were not a ru=
de
people and had a language with soft and nice sounds instead of my harsh a=
nd
crispy sounds. So I abandoned the project (Yes Boudewijn, you had that mu=
ch
influence on me!).
So you idea appeals to me.
Show us more.