Re: CHAT: YAC: or more exactly: yet another conlang sketch
From: | Robert Hailman <robert@...> |
Date: | Tuesday, October 31, 2000, 21:43 |
daniel andreasson wrote:
>
> Robert Hailman wrote:
>
> > { j } is the palatal consonant is Ajuk, and I do use { -ij } to
> > represent /i/ at the end of the root forms of words. This is because, in
> > Ajuk, root forms can't end in vowels other than /i/, and to be
> > orthographically consistent, no root forms can end it vowels, so I use {
> > -ij }. It's just as well, as it does turn out /ij/ when another vowel
> > follows.
>
> Yes, I remembered that there was (at least) one other conlang
> that did this, just couldn't recall which one. Ajuk, I'll have
> to remember that.
I'm organizing my thoughts on a website for Ajuk, I hope to have it up
(relatively) soon.
For loan words that end in vowels other than /i/, Ajuk adds /r/ to them,
for example, "Cuba" becomes "Kubar", /kuba:r/. Apparently some people do
things like this in certain English dialects (like JFK, he said
/kju:b@r/ in certain circumstances), but I wasn't aware of that when I
made that rule in Ajuk.
> I like the -ij of Dutch too, though with a different pronunciation
> then, right Mrs. Rempt-Drijfhout? :)
How is it pronounced in Dutch, I know it exists, and that at one type it
was treated as a single letter (maybe it still is), but I never knew
it's pronounciation.
> I want to have more diphthongs in Rinya! But I don't want to
> change the phonology again! Oh well. Back to the drawing table...
Yes, changing the phonology is something I don't like to do, and as a
result Ajuk has relatively few diphthongs, my conlangs seem to love
them.
> rinya > rinya > rijnya > rijnya
> rinya > rijnya > rijnja
> rinya > rinja > rijnja > rijna
>
> rijna røjna rouna ryjna
>
> So many possibilities!
But that's always the problem with conlanging, isn't it? Not a lack of
possibilities, but an overwhelming abundance of them.
> If I decide on { rijna } then it could be pronounced either [rijna]
> or [rejna] depending on dialect. Hmm...
You may be on to something there. A dialectical change of [ij] to [ej]
could be interesting. Why don't you try it out with sample setances and
see how it goes? It's really up to you, though...
--
Robert