Unrealistically unbalanced phonologies

Lars Finsen wrote:

> It's interesting that we all want our words to feel right. Words are
> surely not merely arbitrary symbols but shaped by something inside us, a
> process that acts when a language is developing too. I have some
> Urianian words developed from IE with regular shifts, but which I don't
> like. I think a real population of speakers would have exchanged them. I
> am thinking to put in some more Gaajan substrate words in their place.
> Anyhow the question is: Is this right-feeling only related to shape, or
> do we have an undiscovered inherent semantism inside us, and will we be
> able to express *everything* once we discover it?
It's more than just that -- a word can be "right" for one language but
less "right" (even "wrong") for a different one. Each language has a
style that has to be followed, even if it's not explicitly defined. Many
Jarda words don't fit well into Minza, and I've been replacing them with
Nimrína words. A couple of Tiki words are even starting to make their
way into Minza (the katamari language -- it rolls up anything it can
catch). Other Jarda words are being modified to sound more Minza-like.
But the words I've been replacing (some from Jarda, even some from
Lindiga which was the main basis for early Minza) were right at home in
their original langs.

The one case where I've been successful in using random numbers to
influence vocabulary is Zharranh. There I made all the individual words
by hand, but randomly assigned meanings to them. Jaghri was also
somewhat successful, but the role of random numbers was more limited in
that language (only assigning the initial letter and placing it in
alphabetical order within a small range).