Re: Euphonic phonology (Was: 'Nor' in the World's Languages)

Hallo!

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 14:01:31 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:

> While I don't find Quenya unpleasant I do find it rather
> boring.  AFA T's languages go, I prefer Sindarin any day,
> [...]
I like Quenya's elaborate case system - but Sindarin has some more "spice"
that Quenya lacks, such as the initial mutations, the front rounded vowels
and the umlaut plurals.  Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

And then there are so many interesting things Tolkien hasn't done in any of
his Quendian languages ...

> Jörg Rhiemeier skrev:
> > Hallo!
> >
> > On Wed, 9 Aug 2006 20:18:39 +0200, Benct Philip Jonsson wrote:
> >
> >> What about the *other* meaning of 'phonology'?(*) how many of us
> >> enjoy making up historical sound changes and groups of interrelated
> >>  languages.
> >
> > I do, very much so.  Old Albic is not meant to be a solitary
> > language; I am planning to build an entire family around it, and
> > already have drafts of the sound changes.  I have concrete plans for
> > at least four further Albic languages, some ideas for a few more, and
> > Albic will in turn be part of a larger "Hesperic" language family.
>
> Can you keep yourself from working on several or all of
> them in tandem?  Do you find it or bad to work on the
> languages one at a time or in tandem?
I find it hard to keep myself from working on several of them at the same
time.  Finishing Old Albic has first priority for me, but what is to do
there is lexicon work, which I find difficult.  So I find myself tinkering
with the sound changes of this or that language and all that instead.
The phonological histories of the main Albic languages are all worked out
to a high degree (though I wouldn't call any of them "finished", and they
all may change in the future); the non-Albic Hesperic languages all lie
almost completely unexplored.  I have postponed them indefinitely; Old
Albic goes first - and then there are things more important in my life
than conlanging.

> [...]
> > What regards Henrik's original question, I don't find it all to
> > difficult to come up with a satisfying phonology.  That, like
> > morphology and syntax, is an easy part to me.  I have difficulties
> > with vocabulary.
>
> I find phonology not hard at all -- always pleasurable
> though it may get complicated!  Grammar is more of a
> struggle while vocabulary is well-nigh impossible.
So we have the same problem.

> I have used computer-generated vocabulary for my
> a-priori langs. [...]
No, that is not for me.  First of all, it requires programming - something
I find no fun doing.  Second, I feel that words must be hand-crafted to
sound "right" - vocabulary generators are to conlanging what rhythm machines
are to music.  Creative work refuses to be automated.

... brought to you by the Weeping Elf