Re: Improved (Short) Ygyde

Andrew Nowicki wrote:

>I believe the sound of the language is the most important
>feature for most speakers. This is why French is rather popular.
Do NOT get me started on how "sounding good" is entirely subjective.

>Perhaps addition of 3 letter roots (CVV = consonant-vowel-vowel)
>would improve the way it sounds. Maybe there should be two
>alternative sets of roots: one set are the existing two letter
>CV roots, while the other set is made of CVV and CCV roots.
ONE set of roots will do fine, but you can extend the number of possible
roots to have BOTH CV and CVV syllables. The original complaints with Ygyde
were that its paucity of roots required words to be too vaguely defined,
thus defeating the purpose of building meaning-based words since the words
had to be memorised as wholes anyway.

>Examples of CCV roots: gla, knu, mne, dwo, psi, sky. The 3
>letter roots would replace two consecutive 2 letter roots in
>some 7 letter words. Obviously, there are 90x90 combinations
>of the CV-CV roots, so the CVV and CCV roots cannot replace
>all the CV-CV combinations.
A compromise between adding the whole slew of CCV roots would be to allow
SOME clusters. But since the CVV roots add so many, you probably wouldn't
need to have any.
Presently, the CVV syllables are taken by the "Long Ygyde" remapping of the
short syllables. This remapping is not necessary, and since most of the
long syllables INCLUDE the short syllables anyway, it helps no one with
pronunciation as it is intended.
"Sounding good" is subjective. Go with your strengths! As far as I can tell
from what I've seen, logically compounding words is the most important
feature of Ygyde. So, anything that increases its ability to do so should
then also increase the ability of speakers to understand and create new
compounds. More roots means more potential for shorter and more precise
compounds. Don't worry if your number of root monosyllables breaks a couple
hundred -- natlangs do this anyway.

M

Reply