Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: ' Khaerakh '

From:Roger Mills <rfmilly@...>
Date:Friday, January 28, 2005, 5:48
Nicolas Walker wrote:

> To anybody that may be able to advise, > > here is my attempt at relating L1 and L2 via the "Proto" word 'khaerakh'. > PLEASE be critical - I would like to know firstly whether the proposed > changes in pronunciation and orthography are 'O.K.' (i.e. likely or > linguistically sound) and secondly, if the relationship proposed is > resonable.
Yes to both questions**, IMO, though with a slight reservation about the diphthongization {: > aI in E.F. (Minor suggestion: most of us don't like or use X-SAMPA [{] for æ (ae lig.)-- [&] is preferred. Specific Conlang revisions of XS are called CXS, available on various websites, for one). ----------------------- **Actually, orthography-wise, it's probably better to use the phonetic/phonemic form for all stages; proto-languages almost by definition weren't written languages but are abstractions based on what can be deduced from evidence in the survivors. ------------------------
> NB: 'khaerakh' has (as yet) no meaning. It is a random word in which to > enact the 'rules' numbered below.
This is actually an unnecessary step, at least with present data. Both languages apparently derive their forms from A.Q=E.I.Q */G{:raX/. However, it may well be you plan other languages that develop directly and differently from ProtoA. Or, it may simply be an accident that this particular word is the same in AQ/EIQ; perhaps others aren't? It might be worthwhile to know what the original stress pattern was; that can influence developments. Also, whether PA */Ga.eraG/ is a single morpheme, or combination of some sort-- compound? derivation?
> > LANG 1: Qalak > > Proto-Archipelagic khaerakh /Ga.eraG/ > > Ancient Qalak kha(e)rakh /G{:raX/ > > Old Qalak kharakh /Xa:rX/ > > Middle Qalak khârak /xa:rax/ > > Modern Qalak hârak /harx/ >
Do unstressed(?) vowels always delete?
> LANG 2: Feamordh > > Proto-Archipelagic khaerakh /Ga.eraG/ > > Early Insular Qalak khaerakh /G{:raX/ > > Late Insular Qalak khaerakh /g{:ra(x)/
EIQ X > LIQ h/__#, which then > 0 in EF; maybe little more natural.
> > Early Feamordh khaera /gaIra/ > > Middle Feamordh khaera /gaIr@/ > > Post-Occupational F. gaer /gaIr/ > > Modern Feamordh cêar /ke:r/ >
This is a nice progression. Do the original forms always develop > monosyllables in both languages?