Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: [romconlang] Romlang splitting off ~0-100 CE

From:Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>
Date:Thursday, March 23, 2006, 13:08

R A Brown <ray@...> writes:
> Benct Philip Jonsson wrote: > > skrev: > >... > >> -m? Or has -m disappeared completely already without any trace? > > It would probably be gone already by then. Not even the Classical > > poets pronounced it, apparently. > > Oh certainly - this is clear from graffiti. The only exception are > monosyllabic words where, we find, the final nasal survives into the > Romancelangs, e.g. Fr. rien (<-- rem), Sp.quien (<-- quem).
Ah, ok. That's something I can work with. :-)
> But there will other problems to decide if one is having a splitting > off as early as the 1st century BC. In particular, was the older > quantitative distinction of vowel length still maintained in the > spoken language, or was it already giving way to the qualitative > distinctions of later Vulgar Latin (from which the Romance langs > derive)?
Benct suspects correctly that I had already decided for the older length distinction system, mainly because it matches Proto-Germanic quite well. Only few things need to be fixed (I think there was no final long -u in Germanic for some unknown reason (to me)). Further, as Sardinian started off with this system, it seems justified historically, too.
> How far had the case system broken down by this time? The accusative > & ablatives had probably fallen together in popular speech.
Really? That'd be too bad. :-/
> But were genitives & datives still holding on or had they already > giving way to periphrastic forms with 'de' and 'a(d)'? The use of > these (and other periphrases) is attested as early as Plautus
As I want a conservative lang, I will probably keep whatever is feasible. Of course, what has collapsed already at the time will be kept collapsed. My question about final -m was also aiming in that direction: are those syllables not counted as heavy (bimoraic) in poetry? And can I not deduce that final -m at least lengthened the preceding vowel? Of course, common speech is not poetry, but lengthening why also explain collapse of acc. and abl.. Otherwise (no lengthening by -m), acc. would have a short vowel while abl. usually would have a long vowel. This would give me a change to keep an acc/abl distinction, since final long vowel vs. final short vowel can introduce hillarious changes in Germanic. :-)
> Graffiti at Pompeii would be helpful as it got preserved in the 1st > century.
I've downloaded what I could find on the internet. Yes, it fits the time quite well. And the adverbs seem to be interesting. :-) **Henrik -- Relay 13 is online:


Benct Philip Jonsson <bpj@...>