Re: Azurian (was Re: [CONLANG] French)

Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:

> quoting me:
>>
>> Azurian:
>> Adle sæm tælar ængliska er fávítingar.
>
> I must say that I like the old way of
> writing Azurian *vowels* better.  While
> the new way makes an extremely easy reading
> for someone who knows Icelandic and/or Faroese
> a combination of the new consonant orthography
> and the old vowel orthography would be a
> realistic combination if the orthography were
> developed under primarily Danish influence.
I'm afraid I will have to disappoint you. I thought the diphthongish
way of writing them did add a slight touch of originality, but I
never could bring myself to like them. So I decided for a more
historical-minded approach. They still are pronounced as diphthongs,
in most dialects.

I am putting some emphasis on inter-readability between the Nordic
languages as well, and besides, I already have some Azurian place and
personal names, which have some authority, though not absolute.

> BTW what does _í_ stand for?
The diphthong /}i/.

> If there is merger of
> Old Norse _i-y_ and _í-ý_ in Az. you may write the
> outcome of the former with _i_ and the latter with
> _y_.
Problem with that is that I have ON /u:/ > Az /y/, for which I prefer
the _y_ character. Using an _í_ when I also had an _á_ and an _ó_
seemed sensible. Modern readers of Azurian will know that they are
dealing with a diphthong when they see those accents.

> BTW 2 Also your idea of voiced stops as the outcome
> of sharpening was attractive.  They might plausibly
> be written _bb dd gg_, since they wouldn't occur
> initially anyway.  If old _bb dd gg_ remain distinct
> they can be written _pp tt kk_ since old _pp tt kk_
> are written _hp ht hk_.
I do have the sharpening as voiced stops in some fringe dialects.
They are invariably velar, though. In most of the rest of the Azurian
language area, they divide into velar and dental, both unvoiced. But
your suggestion to extend them into all three POAs is interesting.
How do you go about that?

> BTW 3 While it's true that _Bláland_ is taken, although
> it is short for _Blámannaland_, what if the native name
> for Azuria is _Bláfold_ or whatever that would become?
> I imagine the language would then become _Bláfolska_
> or _Bloafolska_?
That is attractive somehow, and maybe I should consider it. My
current theory though is that the country of old, long before the
invasions, has been known as Býntarland, from its old Suraetuan name
Bunty. This remained a name for the whole island, but after the
shedding of the southern 1/3 part to the Scottish king, the Azuria
name became fashionable some time later to denote the part north of
the border line. For the whole island, educated people in this period
had a tendency to use the name they found in old Latin manuscripts,
that is: Uriania, instead of the less elegant Býntarland, and perhaps
wanting to have a similarly elegant name for the province is not so
unnatural after all. The name Azuria both connotates the colour blue,
and contains the letters _uria_, which are two reasons why I like it.

Thanks for your comments. They are very much appreciated. Sorry that
I'm being so unreasonable in my reply. After all, Azurian is by no
means fixed yet, and may develop in surprising ways. I haven't even
started properly any systematic work to reconciliate it with the old
personal and place name data that I have, though I have been
considering them loosely so far. Anyway, I'll keep your suggestions
in mind.

LEF