Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: Introducing myself, and several questions

From:Damian Yerrick <tepples@...>
Date:Wednesday, February 16, 2005, 2:14
Quoting "B. Garcia" <madyaas@...>:

> Damian had sent his reply to me, when i'm sure it was meant to go to the > list.
Stupid gmail and its forced Reply-To:. Reposted Mike Ellis wrote:
>There are a few patterns that show up here and there (words for little >things tend towards front vowels and words for big things tend to have back >vowels in them etc etc)
More precisely, this shows a weak correlation of the period of the second formant (1/F2) with the size of the object. Likewise with the period of the fundamental (1/F0) in the tonal African language Ewe.
>but they aren't hard rules and they don't stick in a lot of places
You'd be surprised: * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mama_and_papa * http://www.conknet.com/~mmagnus/Str.html * http://64.233.167.104/search?q=3Dcache:i75hDalvvQgJ:www.percepp.demon.co.uk/= soundsmb.htm * http://cavlec.yarinareth.net/archives/2002/12/11/phonaesthetics/ (caution: possible "cellar door" bias begins halfway down) Though English has "small" and "big", it also has "little" and "large".
>A suggestion: if you're having difficulty generating an a priori vocabulary >that sounds right, try an 'a posteriori' language -- start with an existing >language and then go nuts with sound/grammar changes etc.
Wouldn't I have to worry about offending native speakers of the existing natlang(s) or creators of the existing conlang(s) if I include too many identifiable words? I guess one solution is to take existing words, compound them, and then "erode" them.
>EVERYBODY knows that the word and phrase order of (pick your first language=
)
>is inherently more logical than the rest.
And such an inherent bias is what I'm trying to understand. A known bias is better than an unknown bias. Sanghyeon Seo wrote:
>If you don't want euroclones, there's a very easy way to avoid it: >learn any non-European language!
I've _read about_ other natlangs and their structures, but I've never tried hard to learn to speak one. Am I the only one who got cheated by his middle school and high school, whose foreign language departments taught nothing but IE languages? I guess I just haven't yet had the dedication to work through "teach yourself $LANGUAGE" books from the library, especially because they rarely come with a cassette or CD to compare my pronunciation to. Stephen Mulraney wrote:
>But >a better reason for the low number of distinctive vowel phonemes >might be large array of consonants, which bear more functional >load in the language.
So if being consonant-rich makes a phonetic system tend to be vowel-poor (cf. Caucasian languages), then what are the forces that help a language become consonant-rich? And about Toki Pona: Don't the complaints about vagueness apply in theory to any isolating language, which can be as vague or as specific as the speaker's patience allows for? Sally Caves wrote:
>This does sound like a twelve step program, doesn't it! :)
If only it took only 12 steps to make a conlang :)
>Many of the >linguistic scholars of glossolalia were so sure they could identify the >artificial aspects of that linguistic practice by noting the 1) open >syllables, 2) reduced phonology, 3) echoism, etc. that we find in Hawaiian, >for instance. An over regularity of grammar?
Turkish verbs?
>Sounds, rather, like that South American tribe whose name I can't remember=
;
>I have it on the tip of my tongue. Their language was also almost devoid o=
f
>abstractions, and they showed an inability to calculate, as well, i.e., to >think in abstractions. We even discussed it about a year ago.
Today I was scouring Wikipedia for information on language isolates on a hunch that they might have more off-the-wall ANADEWisms, and I read about Pirah=E3 spoken in Brazil. Is this the one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%FAra-Pirah%E3_language B. Garcia wrote:
>Your own esthetcics, Damian will be different from mine. You may think >you don't have any, but they're there. Try not to judge what your >esthetics should be based upon what others have done with their >languages.
So in other words, do you claim that people won't b***h at me because, say, the elf-counterparts in my conworld speak a more guttural language than the orc-counterparts? You say such a setup would amuse you, but would it offend others?
>It reminds me of those "Folk explanations" that say "such and such >ruler/king/chief had a lazy tongue, so everyone began to imitate him".
Something like that is how French _chaire_ =3D "chair" became _chaise_.
>The pirah=E3 is who you're thinking of. I still can't wrap my head >around not having stories, or histories further back than one's grand >parents.
Well if you can't remember that far back, then you're not going to remember how to defeat the creatures that took your grandparents underground to dine on their flesh :) -- Damian

Replies

Sally Caves <scaves@...>
Henrik Theiling <theiling@...>