Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

CONLANG Digest - 20 Jun 2000

From:Muke Tever <alrivera@...>
Date:Thursday, June 22, 2000, 7:36
> From: Robert Hailman <robert@...> > Subject: Re: English: Thou > > > Or /D@/, which I believe is used in some English dialects. Of course, > > /Du/ was the Old/Middle English pronunciation, before the Great Vowel > > Shift diphthongized it. > > That's what I thought originally, but then wouldn't "you" become /jau/ > at the same time? Unless originally it was pronounced /jo/, or "thou" > was stressed and "you" was unstressed. But before the Great Vowel Shift, > English spelling of vowels was much more regular then it is now, no? > > Maybe I should just pronounce "you" /jau/ out of spite.
Of course, "you" becomes /j@/ also in a lot of contexts...
> From: Robert Hailman <robert@...> > Subject: [Fwd: Re: Conlang Flags (was "Digest-- Flags, millionaire, > etc. (mostly OT)")] > > Oops, I accidentally sent this to Muke Tever him (her?) self rather than > the whole list. Oops.
HIM! I'm a he!
> From: Barry Garcia <Barry_Garcia@...> > Subject: Re: Digest-- Flags, millionaire, etc. (mostly OT) > > You can see the design here: > http://student.monterey.edu/dh/garciabarryjames/world/language/flag.gif
Nice.. [gotta a lot of design work of my own to catch up on, grrr...]
> From: Barry Garcia <Barry_Garcia@...> > Subject: Distinction between adjectives and adverbs > > I've been wondering, is it necessary to have a distinction between > adjectives and adverbs? If so, why? In Saalangal i've been treating the > two the same, and not using any suffix or whatever to make a distinction.
It's probably not "necessary" necessary. My conlangs tend to conflate the two into a general 'modifier' class.
> From: Danny Wier <dawier@...> > Subject: Re: Digest-- Flags, millionaire, etc. (mostly OT) > > >From: Muke Tever <alrivera@...> > > >Well, except that the "syllabic R" in English is a rhotacized schwa (in > >XSAMPA /@`/ and /3`/... is 3 right?). > >So <curb> is /k3`b/. > > I wonder why X-SAMPA uses the retroflex mark with schwa (and /3/, the > mid-open schwa). For me, the syllabic R is more retracted (i.e. > semi-pharyngealized) than retroflex. Mandarin "er" is retroflex.
Well, it's supposed to be the "rhotacized" mark... maybe I used the wrong one.
> Orcs: white skull and crossbones and red dagger on black background. What > else could it be?
Couchant regardant on a field vert, a fluffy pink bunny? ;)
> From: BP Jonsson <bpj@...> > Subject: Re: English: Thou > > BTW: what about using You /jau/ (note Capitalization) as a (representation > of) an honorific?
Well, /jau/ is pretty much characteristic of a cry of pain..(no, wait, that's /y{u/...) But I think in normal use capitalized pronouns (other than 'I' of course) are already used to refer to God, or in titles like Your Honor.
> From: BP Jonsson <bpj@...> > Subject: Re: Millionaire (was Re: CHAT: Vexillology and games (was:
Re:Flag of
> England)) > > Very annoying nonetheless, especially since the guy in the swedish show is > a newsreader and used to take himself seriously.
"the guy is a newsreader"... (does he support killfiles?) That reminded me of some anecdote about the semantic change of 'typewriter' from the operator of the machine to the machine itself (something about the typewriter getting up from her desk and walking out the door...)
> And the questions aren't > that life and death important as "Is that your final answer? Are you > sure?" suggests.
Well, I dunno--the music strikes me as pretty frightening as well, as though when you get it wrong they take you into a back room and tie you to a table and flay you or something. Er, just really dungeony.
> From: Dan Jones <yl-ruil@...> > Subject: Re: English: Thou > > As to the Great Vowel Shift, /u:/ could become either /au/ or /ju:/, which > is why tune is pronounced here in the UK as /tju:n/, from an earlier long > vowel.
I was going over some words (one of my latest projects is studying what makes _regular_ spelling before I try to 'fix' it) and I noticed that (in non-/tju:n/ English anyway) the /j/ in "long U" disappears pretty regularly before r, l, and the dental/palatals (d/t/n/T/D/j/dZ/tS...) "dune tune rune june nuke dew new" but not others (m/p/k/...) "cute puke mute huge mew pew". Anyway, so I'm guessing those are the choices for old /u:/ we here still wouldn't have /Dju:/ even if it had gone that way. [I'm not entirely sure about the pronunciation of <u> yet. I'm still only at <a> (monosyllables with a vowel spelled 'a' or some digraph beginning with 'a').]
> From: Roger Mills <romilly@...> > Subject: OT CHAT: Asperger's syndrome > > Apparently the good people in pharmacology are looking for a remedy. Just > what this poor world needs, a pill to suppress intelligence.
Asperger's is _supposed_ to be a low-grade form of autism. Of course that doesn't mean it won't become the next ADD-fad diagnosis...
> From: Jim Grossmann <steven@...> > Subject: Distinction between adjectives and adverbs > > Hi, all, > > AFAIK, you don't need a morphological distinction; adverbs and
adjectives
> can have the same endings or lack thereof. I think there always has to
be
> some syntactic distinction, though, between modifying a noun and modifying
a
> verb. That is, unless the language in question happens to be Allnoun. > :-)
Only problem is adverbs aren't just "modifying a verb" (in English anyway). Adjectives modify nouns, but adverbs modify verbs, adjectives, and other adverbs (i.e., everything else).
> From: Fior Avant <chiph@...> > Subject: Re: English THOU > > >Actually I think many people, perhaps as a combination of the archaism of > >"thou" and its use towards God, have reanalyzed "thou" as a _formal_
form.
> >I know that's what I thought, till a video game taught me otherwise. > > Yes, and so it's wrong to use THOU as a respectful term. If you said, > towards a noble, THOU he would probably have you arrested :-) THOU shows
NO
> (okay, a little) respect but a "close relationship" to someone.
Well, that's getting prescriptivist ;) I'd wager most Americans (at least who havent studied older English) think of "thou" in the formal register.
> >Yeah, that's definitely how's it's seen now. In Star Wars (Episode 6, I > >think?), Darth Vader asks the Emperor, "What is thy bidding, my master?" > >- definitely a reversal of the original usage! > > I didn't watch "Star Wars" (yeah... I know what I missed) but if they > used THOU/THY/THEE/THINE in that way you tell, that was a big and
unfortunate
> mistake. Like only hollywood can make :-]]]]]
Us'n's don't speak the language =)
> From: Robert Hailman <robert@...> > Subject: Re: English: Thou > > > BTW: what about using You /jau/ (note Capitalization) as a
(representation
> > of) an honorific? > > That's a good idea. That way we can ditch terms like "Your excellency" > and just say /jau/. It might be too late, though, I kicked of using > /jau/ to replace /ju/ today. > > Or maybe /jau/ for the plural, /ju/ for the singular? Just a thought.
Well, <yall> is something like /jau/ already, for those people whose velar l's become w or silent...which isn't too rare an accent around here.
> From: Joe Mondello <Rugpretzel@...> > Subject: Re: Icelandic language (was Re: World Pidgin Suffices) > > Danny Wier gov ra: > > > Yeah, I should've thought of it... Verner's Law has [T] > [D]. So what
do
> > you call it when two phonemes, such as /T/ and /d/ in Icelandic, share
an
> > allophone, [D]? > > neutralization, isn't it? like in English when /t/ and /d/ are allophones
of
> that flap (whats its symbol again?).
I think it's the "r" without the hook thingy, /4/ in X-SAMPA.
> From: Danny Wier <dawier@...> > Subject: Re: English THOU > > >From: Fior Avant <chiph@...> > > >I didn't watch "Star Wars" (yeah... I know what I missed) but if they
used
> >THOU/THY/THEE/THINE in that way you tell, that was a big and unfortunate > >mistake. Like only hollywood can make :-]]]]] > > "I... loveth thee." (Cyan, the swordsman from Final Fantasy VI, an RPG
for
> the Super Nintendo of old)
ROFL! "Mr. Thou!" Hm, did Cyan use "thou" on everybody, or did he "you" the king of Doma?
> From: Adrian Morgan <morg0072@...> > Subject: Re: OT CHAT: Asperger's syndrome > > And put me in a room with lots of people talking to > each other all over the place and I just gotta escape. > Sensory overload has all sorts of nasty effects on my brain, > and all I can do is withdraw into a corner.
Ackackackackack. I *hate* when that happens.
> But such a confrontation is _painful_ to an asperger's person.
Wrrk...
> From: Nik Taylor <fortytwo@...> > Subject: Re: Digest-- Flags, millionaire, etc. (mostly OT) > > > An injunction against "themself" may be speaking from a grammatical POV
that
> > doesn't recognize a "singular they". > > Well, "themself" does exist. I know because I've heard it on several > occasions, can't think of any specifically right now.
Well, yes, I mean that if your orthogrammy dictates that "singular they" is taboo, then "themself" would have to go with it. But lots of people use "singular they" and I suppose "themself" is the natural followafter. Errr, consequent. But I expect a lot of "singular themselves" as well (at least, certainly more than "singular yourselves"...) And yet again I've been off-topic for the whole day. I need motivation :\ I have drawings, programs, webpages, animations for school, work, _and_ conlangs to do, plus trying to get everything ready for my next year at university... Uchk. *Muke!