Re: Egyptian based Conlangs

> Sheets, Jeff wrote:
> > Any Data Online about it?
>
> Not that I know of.  Just out of curiosity, why Egyptian?
>
Besides Stargate, it hasn't been done before.  There's so much available for
a basis for the constructed language, and so much speculation allowable.
The sounds are exotic and ancient, but still pronouncable, which is
currently in contrast to Tit'xka, my previous language.  Tit'xka has three
vowels, each with two allophones, unstressed and stressed.  One of those
vowels (') has only a stressed allophone, as the unstressed is simply
absent.  For instance c'nha /S@nha/ = petty, however san'xaska /santSaska/ =
undefeatable (the ' is absent, not pronounced)  Tit'xka has nine consonants,
one of them being a glottal stop.  One of the consonants is voiced, n.  The
rest are derived from t or k.  Tit'xka was not designed to be easy for
humans to speak rapidly, although, san'xaska is fairly simple.  I wanted to
actually be able to speak in one of my conlangs, and my old ones based on IE
roots are not satisfying to me, they have always been too close to home.
Egyptian is exotic, different, and generally completely different from
English and Romance languages, yet is still fun for me.  Let's just say a
scarab conlang beetle bit me instead of your typical average everyday
conlang bug. :)

> --
> "Cats are rather delicate creatures and they are subject to a good many
> ailments, but I never heard of one who suffered from insomnia." --
> Joseph Wood Krutch
> http://members.tripod.com/~Nik_Taylor/X-Files/
> ICQ #: 18656696
> AOL screen-name: NikTailor
>