Re: Austronesian style Latin...

Hi Barry-- Very interesting, very well done!! I like it, and yet in some
ways I don't-- I think because the two language families are so different in
structure that they're hard to reconcile. But never mind that. :-)

> I decided against that (well, not totally true, but read on), but
> decided to do something more like a creole (in that its got two
> linguistic influences, and a simpler grammar than both languages would
> have), mixing up elements of Malayo-Polynesian languages with Latin.
I think that's the more logical thing to do, rather than trying to work with
really ancient stages.
>
> Anyway, here are the sound changes. These are probably not all 100%
> plausible (well, maybe, they sound fine to me), but are more about
> getting the look and sound right. Of course, the sound isn't 100%
> convincing Malayo-Polynesian (at least Philippine style), but I think
> in many ways, it looks close.
Right on all counts. My only surprise was that C(E,I) and G(E,I) don't also
palatalize. And what about stress? Is it "masyúng" < mansióne- ?

On the cluster-simplification: apparently it doesn't make any difference if
they're pre- vs. post-tonic? What about C-R (fácere)?

I'm especially amused by the two numbers you cite-- adok and katulki, 12 and
14-- they're wonderfully deformed!! what about the others?

Otherwise I don't see much to argue about :-) It'll be interesting to see
some more extensive texts.

Reply