Re: A Conlang, created by the group?
| From: | Carlos Thompson <cthompso@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Thursday, October 8, 1998, 5:36 |
|---|
De: Pablo Flores <fflores@...>
Fecha: Mi=E9rcoles 7 de Octubre de 1998 23:01
>Carlos Thompson wrote:
[...]
>
>>If this is going to be a net language I guess orthography is more
important
>>than phonology. We have 26 letters of Modern Latin (English) alphabet =
we
>>all can type in our keyboards and read in our emails. I would vote to
stick
>>to those letters and have no apostrophe or special mark (I like the & s=
ign
>>in NGL but & is read form of "et" and only used as conjunction, never i=
n
the
>>middle of a word).
>
>I have to disagree to this. Orthography should adequately reflect
phonology,
>being simple, unambiguous, and easy to represent in ASCII. Otherwise we
could
>drop out phonology and make ourselves a code!
Not necesaraly, it would have to be speakable, but actual pronunciation
would be free at some extend. I'm sure you would pronounce "en r=E1pidos
camellos" different than me, but I would understand you. For me it would
difficult to pronounce /q/ as is for Mathias... and I want to speak my
language. Well, I would like something less alien than Mathias.
>>I love consonant clusters, after having try with a lot of projects with
>>strictly CV(N) or C(S)V(N), where (S) stands for aproximants, I would l=
ike
>>to come back to some clusters not difficult to pronounce... nothing lik=
e
dij
>>Schdjarvk... but I would see no problems whit final /s/ /S/ /f/ /l/ /k/
and
>>what ever /r/ means.
>
>/r/ could be the English "r" or the Spanish flapped "r" or the uvular
French "r".
>That we should decide. I would be OK with a C(w, y)V(V)(C).
Just the one of them you feel more confortable with... or sound most alie=
n
to you.
>>Pronunciation of letters:
>[snip]
>>In other words: completely free pronunciation, if you want to pronounce
>>consistily would be okay.
>>
>>Even combinations would be free: _ai_ would be [aj] [aI] [eI] /a.i/ or
what
>>ever.
>
>I think that's taking the issue to the extreme. Granted, we have to have
>some freedom (each phoneme should have variants); but not *that* much.
>We should at least preserve the stop-fricative and voiced-unvoiced
distinctions.
>
Well in that case:
a for [a] [A] or [&]
e for [e] or [E]
i for [i] or [I]
o for [o] or [O]
u for [u] or [U]
y for [y] or [@]
we could give some "correct" pronunciation, and I like positional
pronunciation like [i] when stressed and [I] when unstressed, but actual
pronunciation should be free.
p, b, t, d, k, g, f, v, s, m, n, l, w with their usual IPA sound. p, t =
and
k could be aspirated or unaspirated as dialectical feature, b, d, and g
would never be fricatives. The letter "r" is any flap, trill, rhotic,
retroflex you want.
c, h, j, q, x, z are left, and if we accept Pablo's phonology, /tj/ and
/dj/, /q/ and voiced, /S/ and /Z/, /z/, /x/ and /G/, /nj/, /N/, /lj/, /w=
/
and /j/...
But the /j/ clusters, sugested by Herman, would allow us to approximate s=
ome
of them:
/S/ as /s/+/j/, /Z/ as /z/+/j/, /tj/ and /dj/ as /t/ or /d/ + /j/, /nj/ a=
nd
/lj/ by /n/ or /l/ + /j/. With my free phonology those cluster could be
palatized versions of the sounds or consonant-semivowel clusters, which b=
est
fits your desired phonology.
I personally love <j> for /j/ but as I've seen is not very usual among
conlangers... is not common in English, French or Spanish but common in m=
ost
East and Central European languages. So, if we stick to five vouels, y i=
s
free as consonant, but if we want a /y/ sound and want no u umlaud, lets
take <y> for /y/ and <j> for /j/. My proposal for the remainding
orthography-phonetics:
z for [z]
sj for /sj/ or /S/
zj for /zj/ or /Z/
tj for /tj/ or a voiceless palatal stop
dj for /dj/ or a voiced palatal stop
nj for /nj/ (/n/+/j/ or palatal nasal)
lj for /lj/ (/l/+/j/ or palatal liquid or palatized /l/)
The easy part done. we have c, h, q and x for /x/, /G/, /q/ and a voiced
uvular stop. Let's asign the most obvious: h for /x/ (actually [x] or [h=
]),
and then
c for voiceless uvular stop
x for voiced uvular stop
q for voiced velar or uvular fricative.
I don't like this finnal solution very much... I guess those are the
trickiest letters Latin/English alphabet has. Maybe redone:
c for voiced velar or uvual fricative /G/
q for voiceless uvual stop /q/
x for voiced uvular stop
:-)
affricate clusters:
pf, ts, tsj, dz, dzj...
by the way, I would like better tj and dj for adfricates /tS/ and /dZ/ as
alternative sound.
Then, other clusters: other cases with /j/ and with /r/ and /w/. (cluste=
rs
with /r/ only allowed with occlusives)
Syllabe final consonants: l, m, n, s, /q/ and t.
-n could represent nazalization of previuos vouel (makes Mathias happy?),
but cleary marking our six vowels.
>
>--Pablo Flores
>
>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * =
* *
* *
>
>En gian idgrivar frumneltel frasie'rraser gian pavonn be i mallathar
siqgedu"er.
>"Don't blame your enemy for your misfortune if you've given him a chance=
."
* *
* *
>
>