Re: New Language - Altsag Venchet

Joseph Flatula wrote:
>(Andreas Johansson writes this, among other things)
> > Joseph Flatula wfrote:
[snip]
> > >Vowels
> > >--------
> > >round: ö, ü
> > >front: i, e, a
> > >back: o, u
> > >
> > >If anyone wants, I could give IPA equivalents, but these sounds are all
> > >pretty much as expected.  The umlaut-vowels are front rounded, as in
> > >German.
> > >
> > >Within a word, all vowels must be of compatible classes.  Round vowels
>are
> > >not permitted to go with back vowels.  Any affixes containing a round
>or
> > >back vowel change to match the word they are added to.
> >
> > I take this that the vowels /i e a/ are neutral with regard to vowel
> > harmony. What about words with only these in the root? Do each affix
>have
>an
> > "intrinsic" preference for front or back rounded, or is there some rule
> > holding for all such words?
>
>Each affix is whatever it is, but it will change to match the word.  Maybe
>that makes sense.
>
>For example, -ok is of the back class, but will change to the round class
>for round-class words.
Ok, so words with only "front" vowels can have affices from either other
group. That's, IIRC, not how it works in Turkic vowel harmony, but seems
pretty nifty.

[snip]
>Well, there was more in the way of phonotactics in an older form of the
>language, but many of the changes that led up to this point are no longer
>productive.  If that's what you're seeing, that's great.
>  I didn't want this
>to look like a fully formed language sprung out of nowhere, but as a
>language with its own history.
You seem to've succeeded splendidly in that respect. Irregularities and
semi-regularities that hint at past regularity is something I very much like
in languages, be they natlangs or conlangs.


                                                     Andreas

_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

Reply