Re: writing system for *eestaak

ok, i think i've been ambiguous, so here goes with the
clarification :

 --- Christophe Grandsire
<christophe.grandsire@...> wrote: > En réponse à
bnathyuw <bnathyuw@...>:
>
> >
> > <etymological digression>
> >
> > anyway, the working name for the language is
> eestaak
> > /'e:sta:k/, which, believe it or not ( of course
> you
> > do, this is Conlang ) is derived from the root
> |tarak|
> > with the prefix |ged|. *|gedtarak| contains two
> closed
> > syllables, so the rules of consonant compression
> give
> > |e0edta0ak| ( they're zeros, and the initial |e|
> is
> > epenthetic ) > |eedtaak|. |d| devoices and
> compresses
> > to |s| and you have |eestaak|
> >
> > </etymological digression>
> >
>
> Wow! If you added irregularity, you would have a
> pure case of Maggelity ;))) .
> Of course, it would be even more Maggelish if you
> pronounced the word according
> to its final form "eestaak" but always wrote it
> |gedtarak|!!! :))) My Itakian
> does a bit like that by having a purely phonemic
> script (although it doesn't
> mark tone), but the actual pronunciation of a word
> is always very far from its
> phonemic start ;))) .
>
well, as i point out later, the syllabic script would
write ege`detara`ka, which is almost there. i might
consider having an alphabetic form of gedtarak, as
well as a later, phonetic form of eestaak


> >
> > there were originally nasal vowels, but these
> become
> > homorganic nasals :
> >
> > Nk Ng nt nd mp mb
> > ( ie, all other letters assimilate )
> >
>
> Do you mean that a former sequence nasal vowel+k
> became simple vowel+Nk? While
> for instance a former sequence nasal vowel+s became
> simple vowel+s, simply?
>
i haven't decided on this. |ens| might become |es|, it
might become |ess| or it might become |ent| . . . as
yet undecided.

> > in closed syllables consonants compress :
> >
> > k g h t d s z r p b f v w
> > h 0 0 s z h 0 0 f v w w 0
> > ( zeroes again )
> >
> > Nk Ng nt nd mp mb
> > Ng NN nd nn mp mm
> >
>
> This is not clear to me. Which consonant compresses?
> According to your first
> example, it's the onset consonant which compresses,
> not the coda consonant. A
> strange feature in my opinion (but as you know, I
> love strange features ;))) ).
>
> One question: when does the epenthetic vowel appear
> and why?
>
it's the onset consonant, and the epenthetic vowel
only appears when the first consonant of a word should
be compressed . . . compressed consonants are seen as
weak and need a vowel before them to help them to
support them.

> >
> > so : my proposed syllabary :
> >
> > ka ga ha ta da sa za ra pa ba fa va wa
> > ke ge he te de se ze re pe be fe ve we
> > ko go ho to do so zo ro po be fo vo wo
> >
> > all of these can be marked with one of two
> diacritics
> > :
> > ` and ° ( raised circle )
> >
> > ` marks the consonant as compressed. the nature of
> the
> > consonant therefore changes, and the vowel of the
> > following syllable is dropped
> >
> > ° marks the syllable as nasal. as nasalised
> syllables
> > are also closed, the consonant compresses again,
> and
> > the following syllable's consonant is subject to
> > various changes
> >
> > so :
> > eestaak would be written ege`setara`ka
> > annag would be a°da`ga
> > dihogga would be deso`goga
> > eezzes would be ege`dede`se
> >
> >
> >
> > so : what do people think ? does this sound
> plausible
> > ? workable ? confusing ?
> >
>
> Well, there's just one thing I want to make clear.
> You say that ` marks a
> consonant as compressed. But you always put it on
> the coda consonant (which
> according to your examples doesn't change) while
> it's the *onset* consonant of
> the syllable which compresses (there again, I'm just
> following your examples).
> Now, there's nothing wrong in that, but you cannot
> say that ` marks the
> *compressed* consonant. You can say that ` marks the
> coda consonant. In such, it
> just indicates that you don't pronounce the vowel of
> the syllabic sign marked by
> `. Now since you have a coda consonant, the syllable
> containing it is closed and
> its *onset* consonant compresses. But this needn't
> be marked by the syllabary
> since compression is completely predictable by the
> presence of a coda consonant.
> The same thing happens with the nasal sign. It
> indicates that the consonant of
> the syllabic sign is nasal, which phonetically
> corresponds to the presence of a
> nasal coda to the *previous* syllable, which thus is
> closed, and thus its
> *onset* consonant will compress. There again, being
> completely predictable you
> don't need to mark the compressed consonant in any
> way.
>
ok, my way of writing it out was ambiguous. the reason
being that i didn't mark where syllable signs were
divided. so here's a more explicit version :

eestaak would be written e.ge`.se.ta.ra`.ka
annag would be a°.da`.ga
dihogga would be de.so`.go.ga
eezzes would be e.ge`.de.de`.se

it looks a bit confusing with the diacritic coming
after the vowel, but remember that this is a syllabic
script, so the diacritic is actually attached to the
consonant ( for a comparison imagine writing japanese
|terebi| out as te.re.hi` and you get the idea )

> Well, I'm not really criticising you, actually I
> find the system quite neat. But
> I'm under the impression you don't really understand
> the system you made
> yourself, or you've not been very good at explaining
> it :)) . You seem to think
> (or at least you explain it that way) that your
> marks show a compressed
> consonant, while they show only the presence of a
> coda, which triggers the
> compression of the onset consonant (which is not
> marked in any way in your
> script) of the closed syllable.
that's sort of part of the point : i liked marking the
absence of a following vowel not on the sign without a
vowel, but on the sign before. the compression of the
consonant gave me the excuse to do this . . .

>
> About the script itself, I find the system very
> realistic. It combines features
> of the Devanagari (the ` is definitely a virama, a
> sign showing that the vowel
> of the syllabic sign *mustn't* be pronounced) and of
> Linear B (like the use of
> the syllable sign with the same vowel as the
> previous one to mark a coda
> consonant - ie. tak is written ta-ka, tek te-ke -).
> All in all, a very plausible
> script.
>
> > later i'll post some images and see what people
> think
> > on them,
> >
>
> I can't wait to see them!!! :))
>
patience ! but i'll do my best . . .

bn


=====
bnathyuw | landan | arR
stamp the sunshine out | angelfish
your tears came like anaesthesia | phèdre

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com

Reply