Re: Becoming triconsonantal, was: 'Arabiiya

En réponse à Vasiliy Chernov <bc_@...>:

>
> I'm happy to hear that. Keep me informed :)
>
He he, given my job, Dutch classes and the fact that I have a life :))) , I
wasn't able to advance much on Itakian, and Arabo-Romance will come after I've
been able to do at least one translation in Itakian (I'm a little fed up with
all my projects which end up as grammars without words). So it'll take a while
before I rework on Arabo-Romance (especially since I intend to evolve it like a
natural language, that's to say with sound changes from Classical Latin).

>
> As for the syllable structure, it's easy: CV(C) :)
>
My plan is to transform the (S)C(C)V(V)(C) (or so :)) ) structure of Latin into
CV(C) with possible CC ends. I already have some funny sound changes sure, like
dissimilation acting in the cluster /mn/ producing /bn/ :))) .

> But do you plan for any Arabic-like alternations? I sort of can't
> imagine
> an agglutinative version of Arabic :)
>
Well, I'm not sure how it will get, but one thing is sure is that it's get a
prefix-based conjugation in the present, like Arabic (based on subject pronouns
of Latin), and suffix-based in the past, also like Arabic (based on the perfect
endings). The subjunctive and future will probably collapse into a single
subjunctive. As for nouns, I intend to simplify the declinations to have
something like the ones of Classical Arabic (I'm even gonna get a tanwiyn from
suffixed Latin "un(us)" :))) ) As a whole, Arabo-Romance will look like Arabic
made of Latin roots, but without much of the vowel alternations and a weaker
sense of the root. Arabic is quite agglutinating in fact, especially in the
verbal structure.

>
> It would be really helpful to have an electronic wordlist with
> lengths,
> even without translations.
>
True, the translations I can always find in my little dictionnary of Latin,
which unfortunately doesn't display the length marks consistently.

> >Descending a Romance lang
> >from Classical Latin may seem artificial,
>
> No, I don't think so. It only means that your lang got split before
> some common (West-) Romance innovations.
>
The difficulty being to explain the split. My idea is of a group of Romans
(mostly men) leaving Rome for some reason (maybe at the end of the Republic)
and ending up around *here*'s Medina or Mecca. Details still unknown.

>
> Yes, Sardinian is a good example here.
>
I'm still wondering how Sardinian could evolve like that. Was is so much
isolated from other countries?

> >And of course, somebody who could explain me what the stress
> >patterns are in Arabic
>
> It's easy: exactly like in Latin (but tanwins and other short-vowel
> endings
> are deleted *after* applying the rule; OTOH, no reservations
> associated
> with syllable boundaries, since a syllable can begin only with one
> consonant; article, prepositions etc. are kept apart, except in
> pronominal
> forms).
>
> >(take Modern Classical Arabic, not dialects, so that I
> >can consider that it's not far from the stress pattern of Arabic in
> the
> >time of
> >Mahomet or before).
>
> Hm... this is a bit more difficult. I tried to read some pre-Islamic
> rhymed poetry, and my impression was that accentuation rules may have
> differed. But what's the problem? Anyway, the accent was
> non-phonological,
> entirely depending on segments.
>
Thanks. This will help me.

Christophe.

http://rainbow.conlang.free.fr

Take your life as a movie: do not let anybody else play the leading role.

Reply